Trends and Regional Variation in Prevalence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Association With Socioeconomic Status in Canada, 2005-2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Cardiovascular disease remains the second leading cause of death in Canada. Monitoring and tracking the trends and disparities in major cardiovascular risk factors could provide benchmarks for future cardiovascular health strategies. Objective: To investigate the temporal trends, regional variations, and socioeconomic disparities in major cardiovascular risk factors in Canada from 2005 to 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional survey study included adults aged 20 years and older from 6 Canadian Community Health Survey cycles between 2005 and 2016. Cardiovascular risk factors included hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and current smoking. Socioeconomic status was measured using equivalized household income. Data analysis was performed from September 2019 to April 2020. Exposures: A total of 112 health regions and socioeconomic status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Age- and sex-adjusted prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and current smoking by year; health regions; and socioeconomic status. Absolute numbers were rounded to base 100 for confidentiality purposes, and percentages were based on weighted numbers. Slope index of inequality (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) were calculated to assess absolute and relative socioeconomic inequalities, respectively. Results: A total of 670 000 respondents (329 000 [49.1%] men; 341 000 [50.9%] women) aged 20 years and older from 6 survey cycles were enrolled for this study. The largest age group was those aged 40 to 59 years (eg, 2005 cycle: 40.2% [95% CI, 39.9%-40.6%]). In the 2015/2016 cycle, the overall age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rates of hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and current smoking were 20.7% (95% CI, 20.4%-21.1%), 7.2% (95% CI, 7.0%-7.5%), 20.1% (95% CI, 19.7%-20.6%), and 17.8% (95% CI, 17.4%-18.2%), respectively. From 2005 to 2016, there was a significant increase in the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity (eg, prevalence of diabetes in both sexes, 2005: 5.8% [95% CI, 5.6%-6.0%]; 2015/2016: 7.2% [95% CI, 7.0%-7.5%]; P < .001) but a significant decrease in the prevalence of current smoking (both sexes, 2005: 22.1% [95% CI, 21.7%-22.5%]; 2015/2016: 17.8% [95% CI, 17.4%-18.2%]; P < .001). The prevalence of all the risk factors varied widely across health regions (eg, obesity, Vancouver Health Service Delivery Area: 6.7% [95% CI, 4.5%-9.0%]; Miramichi Area: 36.8% [95% CI, 27.3%-46.3%]). In addition to obesity among men, all risk factors tended to be more common among those with lower income (eg, prevalence of hypertension in both sexes, 2015/2016, lowest income group: 23.2% [95% CI, 22.4%-24.0%]; highest income group: 18.4% [95% CI, 17.7%-19.1%]). The SII and RII indicated consistent absolute and relative socioeconomic inequalities in hypertension, diabetes, and current smoking over time (eg, RII for hypertension in both sexes, 2005: 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.33; 2015/2016: 1.34; 95% CI, 1.26-1.43). However, the phenomenon of absolute and relative socioeconomic inequalities in obesity was only observed among women (eg, RII for 2015/2016 for obesity in women; 1.74 (95% CI, 1.56-1.93); men: 1.09; 95% CI, 0.99-1.21). Conclusions and Relevance: During the study period, the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity significantly increased, while the prevalence of current smoking significantly decreased. Geographic and socioeconomic gaps should be considered and addressed in future interventions and policies targeted at reducing these cardiovascular risk factors in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".