The prevalence of multimorbidity and associations with lifestyle factors among middle-aged Canadians: an analysis of Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity can be defined as the presence of more than one chronic condition in an individual. Research on multimorbidity has predominantly focused on older adults and few studies have examined multimorbidity in middle-aged people. The objectives of this study were to: 1) examine the prevalence of multimorbidity among middle-aged Canadians; and 2) examine the association between lifestyle factors (smoking, alcohol intake, physical activity) and multimorbidity in this age group. METHODS: In this analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) baseline data, we extracted data from 29,841 participants aged 45-64 years from a database of 51,338 people aged 45-85 years. Self-reported data on 27 chronic physical health conditions were used to derive different multimorbidity definitions. We estimated the prevalence of 3+ to 5+ chronic physical health conditions in different subgroups for descriptive purposes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between socio-demographic and lifestyle factors, and multimorbidity using a 3+ multimorbidity case definition. RESULT: We found that 39.6% (99% CI 38.4-40.7) of participants had three or more chronic conditions with a mean number of chronic condition of 2.41 (99% CI 2.37-2.46). The prevalence of multimorbidity increased with age from 29.7% in the 45-49-year-old age group to 52% in individuals aged 60-64 years. The prevalence of 4+ and 5+ chronic conditions was 24.5 and 14.2% respectively. Analyses indicated that female sex and low income were associated with higher odds of multimorbidity, whereas daily or weekly alcohol intake were associated with lower odds of multimorbidity. Exercise was not associated with multimorbidity. Results were similar when analyses were conducted separately for women and men. CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity is not limited to older adults, but is a common phenomenon among middle-aged people. Longitudinal research is needed to better understand the temporal relationship between lifestyle factors and multimorbidity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".