Multimorbidity and mortality in Ontario, Canada: A population-based retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between multimorbidity and mortality, and whether relationship varied by material deprivation/rural location and by age. METHODS: Retrospective population-based cohort study conducted using 2013-14 data from previously created cohort of Ontario, Canada residents classified according to whether or not they had multimorbidity, defined as having 3+ of 17 chronic conditions. Adjusted rate ratios were calculated to compare mortality rates for those with and without multimorbidity, comparing rates by material deprivation/rural location, and by age group. RESULTS: There were 13,581,191 people in the cohort ages 0 to 105 years; 15.2% had multimorbidity. Median length of observation was 365 days. Adjusted mortality rate ratios did not vary by material deprivation/rural location; overall adjusted mortality rate ratio was 2.41 (95% CI 2.37-2.45). Adjusted mortality rate ratios varied by age with ratios decreasing as age increased. Overall rate ratio was 14.7 (95% CI 14.48-14.91). Children (0-17 years) had highest ratio, 40.06 (95% CI 26.21-61.22). Youngest adult age group (18-24 years) had rate ratio of 9.96 (95% CI 7.18-13.84); oldest age group (80+ years) had rate ratio of 1.97 (95% CI 1.94-2.04). CONCLUSION: Compared to people without multimorbidity, multimorbidity conferred higher risk of death in this study at all age groups. Risk was greater in early and middle adulthood than in older ages. Results reinforce the fact multimorbidity is not just a problem of aging, and multimorbidity leads not only to poorer health and higher health care utilization, but also to a higher risk of death at a younger age.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".