MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Can lifestyle factors explain racial and ethnic inequalities in all-cause mortality among US adults?

2023· other· en· W6977338187 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicProbability and Statistical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupMarital statusInequalityRace (biology)National Health Interview SurveyBody mass indexVulnerability (computing)National Death IndexMediation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Racial and ethnic inequalities in all-cause mortality exist, and individual-level lifestyle factors have been proposed to contribute to these inequalities. In this study, we evaluate the extent to which the association between race and ethnicity and all-cause mortality can be explained by differences in the exposure and vulnerability to harmful effects of different lifestyle factors. Methods The 1997–2014 cross-sectional, annual US National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) linked to the 2015 National Death Index was used. NHIS reported on race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latinx), lifestyle factors (alcohol use, smoking, body mass index, physical activity), and covariates (sex, age, education, marital status, survey year). Causal mediation using an additive hazard and marginal structural approach was used. Results 465,073 adults (18–85 years) were followed 8.9 years (SD: 5.3); 49,804 deaths were observed. Relative to White adults, Black adults experienced 21.7 (men; 95%CI: 19.9, 23.5) and 11.5 (women; 95%CI: 10.1, 12.9) additional deaths per 10,000 person-years whereas Hispanic/Latinx women experienced 9.3 (95%CI: 8.1, 10.5) fewer deaths per 10,000 person-years; no statistically significant differences were identified between White and Hispanic/Latinx men. Notably, these differences in mortality were partially explained by both differential exposure and differential vulnerability to the lifestyle factors among Black women, while different effects of individual lifestyle factors canceled each other out among Black men and Hispanic/Latinx women. Conclusions Lifestyle factors provide some explanation for racial and ethnic inequalities in all-cause mortality. Greater attention to structural, life course, healthcare, and other factors is needed to understand determinants of inequalities in mortality and to advance health equity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.372
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.066 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it