Income and education inequalities in ovarian cancer mortality in Canada: 1990–2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ovarian cancer ranks as the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths among Canadian women. This study aims to investigate trends in socioeconomic inequalities in ovarian cancer mortality over the past three decades, from 1990 to 2019. A dataset was construed at Census Division (n = 280) level in Canada using information from the Canadian Vital Statistics Death Database, the Canadian Census of Population and the National Household Survey. Socioeconomic inequalities in ovarian cancer mortality were assessed using the age-standardized Concentration Index (C), based on average/median equivalized household income, and educational attainment (bachelor’s degree or higher). The average crude mortality rate for ovarian cancer in Canada was 9.7 per 100,000, with the highest rates in British Columbia and the Atlantic region. The negative values of age-standardized C based on average income and educational attainment – indicating higher ovarian cancer mortality rates among low socioeconomic groups – reached statistical significance in certain years, particularly in the more recent period. Trend analysis revealed a notable pattern of increasing income inequality in ovarian cancer mortality over time based on average income. The observed socioeconomic inequalities in ovarian cancer mortality warrant further investigation to identify the underlying factors contributing to this pattern in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".