Prevalence and risk factors of the most common multimorbidity among Canadian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of persons living with multimorbidity-defined as the co-occurrence of at least two chronic conditions in the same individual-is growing globally, especially in developed countries. Traditionally, this increase has been attributed to a growing aging population, sedentary lifestyle, obesity, low socioeconomic status, and individual genetic susceptibility. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and associated risk factors of the most common multimorbidity (MCM) among Canadian middle-aged and older adults. METHOD: Relevant data on all 30,097 middle-aged and older Canadian adults (aged 45 to 85 years) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging were used for this study. To identify the specific sociodemographic risk factors associated with the MCM, we used survey-specific logistic regression. FINDINGS: Overall, co-occurrence of osteoarthritis and hypertension was identified as the MCM among Canadian adults aged 45+ with an estimated prevalence of 16.5%. The results from multivariate analysis showed that seven factors were significantly associated with increased odds of the MCM, which included increasing age, being retired from work (retired vs not retired), poorer rating of perceived health, (very good, good, poor vs excellent), increasing problems with sleep quality (satisfied, dissatisfied vs neutral), and abnormal body-mass index (underweight, overweight, obese vs normal). Also, residents in other urban centres had significantly lower odds than those in urban core. Persons living in Atlantic Canada, Ontario and Quebec were at increased odds of having the MCM compared to those in British Columbia. The odds of the MCM associated with increasing age was significantly higher among Females (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.11-1.13) than Males (OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.07-1.10). CONCLUSION: Multimorbidity is a common feature among Canadian adults. The identification of the most prevalent patterns and associated risk factors in this study provides fresh insights into the etiology, progression, and possible prevention of the MCM among Canadian adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".