A comparison of self-reported chronic disease, health awareness and behaviours in social housing residents: cross-sectional study of communities in Ontario and Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Social housing programs are integral to making housing more affordable to Canadian seniors living in poverty. Although the programs are similar across Canada, there may be inter-provincial differences among the health of residents that could guide the development of interventions. This study explores the health of low-income seniors living in social housing in Quebec and compares it with previously reported data from Ontario. RESULTS: 80 responses were obtained in Quebec to compare with the previously reported Ontario data (n = 599) for a total of 679 responses. More Ontario residents had access to a family doctor (p < 0.001). Quebec residents experienced less problems with self-care (p = 0.017) and less mobility issues (p = 0.052). The visual analog scale for overall health state was similar in both provinces (mean = 67.36 in Ontario and 69.23 in Quebec). Residents in Quebec smoked more cigarettes per day (p = 0.009). More residents in Ontario participated in moderate physical activity (p = 0.09), however, they also spent more time per day on the computer (p = 0.006).
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".