Health Predictors of Neighborhood Selection: A Prospective Cohort Study of Residential Mobility in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health selection into neighborhoods describes unhealthy people moving disproportionately to lower-income neighborhoods, producing observable socioeconomic gradients sometimes falsely attributed to neighborhood effects on health. We investigated residential mobility outcomes and their relationship to baseline health using population-level data linkages in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We included Canadian Community Health Survey respondents ages 25 to 64 between 2005 and 2014 (n = 93,235). We assessed baseline health using self-reported health and multimorbidity. We captured moves using health administrative data and the Canadian census. We fit multinomial logistic regression models with a six-category residential mobility outcome: (1) nonmovers from low-income neighborhoods; (2) nonmovers from high-income neighborhoods; (3) movers from low-income to low-income; (4) movers from low-income to high-income; (5) movers from high-income to low-income; and (6) movers from high-income to high-income. We adjusted models for the Canadian Community Health Survey cycle, age, sex, household income, immigrant status, and residential instability. RESULTS: Compared with those with very good or excellent health, respondents reporting fair or poor health at baseline had higher odds of moving from low- to low-income neighborhoods (Adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.46, 2.05), moving from high- to low-income (aOR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.35, 1.98), moving from low- to high-income (aOR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.04, 1.54), and not moving within low-income (aOR = 1.36; 1.23, 1.51) relative to not moving within high-income. Results were consistent for objective health measures, comparing respondents with at least four chronic conditions to those with one or none. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, population-based study, both subjective and objective measures of health had a strong relationship with residential mobility outcomes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".