An investigation into the impact of deprivation on demographic inequalities in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This research investigates the impact of deprivation on demographic inequalities in England and Wales among adults. Using demographic measures including the modal age at death, life expectancy, lifespan variation and mortality, it shows a negative correlation with deprivation as measured by the 2015 Index of Multiple Deprivation. Although it finds that life expectancy is increasing overall and the gap between men and women is lessening, improvements are slower paced in more deprived areas such that the gap between rich and poor is slowly worsening over time. Men are more adversely impacted by deprivation than women with the gap in period life expectancy at age 30 in 2015 between the top and bottom 1% of deprived neighbourhoods at 10.9 years for men and 8.4 years for women. Between 2001 and 2015 inequalities in male mortality rates at age 44 were 4.4 times greater in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods than those in the 10% least deprived and were much higher than in intervening deciles. The worst deprivation is concentrated in specific areas. For example, in 22 out of 326 English districts, 25% or more of neighbourhoods are in the most deprived 10% and in 5 districts it is 40% or above.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".