Mortality among Canadian population with multimorbidity: A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of multimorbidity and the joint effect of chronic diseases on all-cause mortality among subjects aged 35 years and above. Study Design: Population-based retrospective cohort study. Methods: Multimorbidity was defined by the respondent's self-report of having two or more chronic diseases of the nine considered. The Canadian Community Health Surveys conducted in 2003/2004, 2005/2006 and 2007 to 2014 were linked with the Canadian Vital Statistics Death Database to examine the association between multimorbidity and all-cause mortality in subjects aged 35 years and above. Cox's proportional hazards models were used to estimate risk of multimorbidity on death after adjusting for the confounders in three age groups. Results: Multimorbidity had an increased risk of death in all three age groups with the youngest having the highest risk after adjusting for potential confounders (35 to 54 years: hazard ratio (HR) = 3.77, 95% CI: 3.04, 4.67; 55 to 64 years: HR = 2.64, 95% CI: 2.36, 2.95; 65 years and above: HR = 1.71; 95% CI:1.63,1.80). Subjects with cancer had the highest risk of death in the three age groups. When the interactions between chronic diseases were considered, subjects with COPD and diabetes had a significantly increased risk of death in comparison to those without COPD or diabetes in the 55 to 64 years. (HR = 2.59, 95% CI: 2.01, 3.34). Conclusions: Prevention of multimorbidity should be targeted not only in the older population but also in the younger populations. Synergistic effects of chronic diseases should be considered in the management of multimorbidities.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".