Self-Rated Health by Sexual Orientation Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This article examines patterns of self-rated physical and mental health by sexual orientation among middle-aged and older adults in Canada, a rapidly growing subpopulation shown to be at risk of poor health. METHOD: We use the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS 2015-2016) to estimate logit models predicting fair/poor self-rated physical and mental health by sexual orientation among middle-aged and older adults, stratifying by sex and age group. RESULTS: We find no differences in physical health for gay men and lesbian women compared with their heterosexual counterparts. However, middle-aged gay men are disadvantaged in terms of mental health, but not women. Bisexual women are disadvantaged in terms of physical health, and for mental health in some model specifications. Respondents who did not know their sexual orientation have poorer health across some measures of health and age groups. DISCUSSION: Our findings add to the paucity of research on older sexual minorities in Canada. They highlight the importance of separating out sexual minority groups because bisexual women have distinct health profiles. In addition, this is the first study to examine the health of respondents who "do not know" their sexual orientation, and future research should distinguish between different explanations for their poor health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".