Modal lifespan and disparity at older ages by leading causes of death: a Canada-U.S. comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The U.S. elderly experience shorter lifespans and greater variability in age at death than their Canadian peers. In order to gain insight on the underlying factors responsible for the Canada-U.S. old-age mortality disparities, we propose a cause-of-death analysis. Accordingly, the objective of this paper is to compare levels and trends in cause-specific modal age at death ( M ) and standard deviation above the mode ( SD ( M +)) between Canada and the U.S. since the 1970s. We focus on six broad leading causes of death, namely cerebrovascular diseases, heart diseases, and four types of cancers. Country-specific M and SD ( M +) estimates for each leading cause of death are calculated from P -spline smooth age-at-death distributions obtained from detailed population and cause-specific mortality data. Our results reveal similar levels and trends in M and SD ( M +) for most causes in the two countries, except for breast cancer (females) and lung cancer (males), where differences are the most noticeable. In both of these instances, modal lifespans are shorter in the U.S. than in Canada and U.S. old-age mortality inequalities are greater. These differences are explained in part by the higher stratification along socioeconomic lines in the U.S. than in Canada regarding the adoption of health risk behaviours and access to medical services.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".