The social determinants of healthy ageing in the Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A better knowledge of the social determinants of health (SDH) promoting healthy ageing in Inuit communities is needed to adapt health and social policies and programs. This study aims to identify SDH associated with healthy ageing. Using the 2006 Aboriginal Peoples Survey (n = 850 Inuit aged ≥50 years), we created a holistic indicator including multiple dimensions of health and identified three groups of participants: those in 1) good 2) intermediate and 3) poor health. Sex and age-adjusted multinomial regression models were applied to assess the associations between this indicator and SDH measured at the individual, household and community scales. In comparison to APS respondents in the "Poor health" profile, those in the "Good health" profile were more likely to have a higher individual income, to participate in social activities, and to have stronger family ties in the community ; those in the "Intermediate health" profile were less likely be in a relationship, more likely to live in better housing conditions, and in better-off communities. Results indicate that SDH associated with the "Good health" profile related more to social relationships and participation, those associated with the "Intermediate health" profile related more to economic and material conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".