Social Determinants of Racial Disparities in Cognitive Functioning in Later Life in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objectives of this study were (a) to assess the nature and extent of racial disparities in cognitive functioning among older adults in Canada, and (b) to assess the role of socioeconomic factors and patterned health behaviors as social determinants of racial disparities in cognitive functioning. Method: Data were drawn from the 2009-2010 Canadian Community Health Survey. The study sample included 20,646 people aged 60 years or older. Ordered logistic regression analyses were carried out to test hypotheses linking race, socioeconomic factors, and patterned health behaviors, and cognitive functioning. Results: Our findings revealed a racial gap in cognitive functioning among older adults in Canada. This gap was, in part, mediated by socioeconomic inequalities (in income and food security) and socially patterned behaviors (i.e., drinking, physical activity levels). However, socioeconomic status (SES) and behavioral factors appeared to operate independently of one another. Discussion: The findings suggest a need to focus on the direct effects of race as well as its indirect effects, through socioeconomic factors and patterned health behaviors, for an understanding of racial disparities in cognitive functioning.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".