MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196411496 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100904

Income inequality and COVID-19 mortality: Age-stratified analysis of 22 OECD countries

2021· article· en· W3196411496 on OpenAlexaff
Edgardo R. Sepulveda, Ann‐Sylvia Brooker

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoisson regressionGini coefficientInequalityEconomic inequalityMultivariate statisticsDemographyPovertyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Mortality ratePandemicDemographic economicsEconomicsStatisticsMedicineMathematicsPopulationEconomic growthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study builds on a growing body of research that demonstrates an association between income inequality and COVID-19 mortality. Using Poisson multivariate regression, we age-stratify our analysis by separately examining each of four age groups over a nine-month study period in 22 OECD countries. Our full regression model controls for national median income and relative poverty, and a set of pandemic-specific variables to capture exposure, susceptibility and treatment. We found that country-level income inequality, as measured by the disposable income Gini coefficient, is significantly and positively associated with COVID-19 mortality for all four age groups. Consistent with previous studies that analyzed all-cause mortality by age, our regression results found that the point estimate of the Gini coefficient generally declines with age. Our results suggest that inequality is possibly acting through generic and pandemic-specific processes to increase mortality via a more pronounced negative COVID-19 socio-economic status gradient in higher inequality countries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.353 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations64
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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