MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004933030 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100553

Agreement between area- and individual-level income measures in a population-based cohort: Implications for population health research

2020· article· en· W3004933030 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emmalin Buajitti, Sabrina Chiodo, Laura C. Rosella

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusDemographyHousehold incomePopulationConcordanceMedicineGeographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Socioeconomic status is an important determinant of health, the measurement of which is of great significance to population health research. However, individual-level socioeconomic factors are absent from much health administrative data, resulting in widespread use of area-level measures in their place. This study aims to clarify the role of individual- and area-level socioeconomic status in Ontario, Canada, through comparison of income measures. Using data from four cycles (2005-2012) of the Canadian Community Health Survey, we assessed concordance between individual- and area-level income quintiles using percent agreement and Kappa statistics. Individual-level characteristics were compared at baseline. Cumulative adult premature mortality was calculated for 5-years following interview. Rates were calculated separately for area-level and individual-level income, and jointly for each combination of income groups. Multivariable negative binomial models were fit to estimate associations between area- and individual-level income quintile and premature mortality after adjustment for basic demographics (age, sex, interview cycle) and key risk factors (alcohol, smoking, physical activity, and body mass index). Agreement between individual- and area-level income measures was low. Kappa statistics for same and similar (i.e. ±1 quintile) measures were 0.11 and 0.48, indicating low and moderate agreement, respectively. Socioeconomic disparities in premature mortality were greater for individual-level income than area-level income. When rates were stratified by both area- and individual-level income quintiles simultaneously, individual-level income gradients persisted within each area-level income group. The association between income and premature mortality was significant for both measures, including after full adjustment. Area-level socioeconomic status is an inappropriate proxy for missing individual-level data. The low agreement between area- and individual-level income measures and differences in demographic profile indicate that the two socioeconomic status measures do not capture the same population groups. However, our findings demonstrate that both individual- and area-level income measures are associated with premature mortality, and describe unique socioeconomic inequities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.132
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.226
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1320.226
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.427
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.069 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations111
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207