Housing tenure and hospital admissions for acute lower respiratory tract infections in children less than 2 years: A Scottish birth cohort (2010-2012)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo estimate the association between household tenure and the odds of hospital admission for acute lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) in children under age 2 years. MethodsWe developed a birth cohort of all singleton children born in Scotland 2010-2012, using linked birth registration records and maternal Census 2011 data. Further linkage to hospital admission records provided information on acute LRTI (pneumonia, bronchitis, bronchiolitis, influenza, unspecified LRTI) admissions in children aged less than 2 years. Using logistic regression models, we estimated the association between housing tenure at birth (owned, social rented, private rented/lives rent free) with odds of hospital admission for LRTI before and after adjustment for parental occupational class (household reference), family type and highest qualification level. ResultsFrom the cohort of all 174,279 births in 2010-2012, 84.1% linked to a maternal census record. Children whose parents were married or had a UK-born mother were more likely to link to a Census record. In the final linked cohort of 141,336 children, 7,486 (5.3%) were admitted to hospital for one or more LRTI during the 2 years of follow up. We found an association between housing tenure and LRTI admissions, with children residing in social rented, compared to owned housing having higher odds of an LRTI admission, OR: 1.40 (1.32-1.47); and children living in private rented/rent free housing, compared to owned, OR: 1.18 (1.11-1.26). After adjustment for household socioeconomic circumstances, these estimates attenuated to OR: 1.18 (1.11-1.27) and OR: 1.10 (1.03-1.18) respectively. ConclusionAfter accounting for household socioeconomic circumstances, children living in social and private tenured accommodation, compared to children living in owned accommodation were more likely to be hospitalised for an acute LRTI during the first 2 years of life. Further research to understand the contribution specific housing circumstances make to inequalities in LRTI hospitalisations early in life is needed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".