MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360620534 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069246

Inequity and vulnerability in Latin American Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations with rheumatic diseases: a syndemic approach

2023· article· en· W4360620534 on OpenAlexaff
Ysabel Granados, Alfonso Gastelum‐Strozzi, José Álvarez-Nemegyei, Rosana Quintana, Flor Julián-Santiago, Ana María Santos, Sergio Guevara-Pacheco, Adalberto Loyola‐Sánchez, María Victoria Goycochea-Robles, Vicente Juárez, Mario Alberto Garza‐Elizondo, Juan C. Rueda, Rubén Burgos‐Vargas, John Londoño, Bernardo A. Pons‐Estel, Ingris Peláez‐Ballestas

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Health and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversidad de CuencaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsMedicineIndigenousSyndemicLatin AmericansVulnerability (computing)Public healthEnvironmental healthEcologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Syndemics are a framework that documents health inequities and vulnerabilities in populations with rheumatic diseases. Compared with other approaches, syndemics are able to conjunctly consider epidemiological, biological, sociodemographic and economic factors, and their interactions. OBJECTIVE: To estimate health inequity and vulnerability among Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) in Latin America using the syndemic approach. DESIGN: This is a secondary analysis of a previously published large-scale study on the prevalence of RMD. SETTING: Studies carried out in five Latin American countries (Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico and Venezuela). Health inequity and vulnerability in RMD were identified through a syndemic approach using network and cluster analysis. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 44 560 individuals were studied: 29.78% self-identified as Indigenous, 60.92% were female, the mean age was 43.25 years. Twenty clusters were identified in the Indigenous population and 17 in the non-Indigenous population. RESULTS: The variables associated with RMD among Indigenous populations were rurality, public health system, high joint biomechanical stress, greater pain, disability and alcoholism; and among non-Indigenous people they were being a woman, urban origin, older age, private health system, joint biomechanical stress, greater pain and disability. We identified different health inequities among patients with RMD (ie, lower educational attainment, more comorbidities), associated with factors such as Indigenous self-identification and rural residence. CONCLUSIONS: A syndemic approach enables us to identify health inequities in RMD, as shown by higher prevalence of comorbidities, disability and socioeconomic factors like lower educational attainment. These inequities exist for the overall population of patients with RMD, although it is more evident in Indigenous groups with added layers of vulnerability.

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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicIndigenous Health and EducationFrench-language works237,207