MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7038256191

Health Inequalities of Older People in China

2018· dissertation· en· W7038256191 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilQueen's University
KeywordsInequalityHealth equitySocioeconomic statusSocial inequalitySocial determinants of healthLife course approachChinaPublic health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China is facing serious population aging issues because of unintended consequences of the economic reforms and social policies which began in the 1980s. Despite the remarkable progress in health status (e.g., the increasing life expectancy) in China, there remain large inequalities not only across the country, but also at a micro geographic scale. Health inequalities can be attributed to biological variations but also other variables including demographic socioeconomic and environmental indicators. Research on health inequalities in western countries is robust. However, there are few comprehensive studies of health inequalities in China. This research analyses the patterns of health inequalities and the associated social determinants of health with a specific focus on Chinese older people. Mixed methods are employed to garner a nuanced perspective on health inequalities and the social determinants of health. Data are extracted from both statistical surveys and semi-structure interviews. Quantitative methods are used to analyse the relationships between health inequalities and social determinants of health at various geographic scales. An analysis of semi-structured interviews is used to inform the quantitative finding providing further depth to an understanding of health inequalities among older people living in China. Several major findings result from this research. The population aging process has a significant influence on health inequalities for older people. China exhibits a significant rural-urban developmental divide with a noticeable impact on health inequalities. Socio-economic changes have significant impacts on health inequalities in China. The relationship between better socio-economic status and better health status is similar to but different than what is found in research in developed countries because of the various types of pensions. Compared to traditional environmental factors, the built environment in which older people live plays a significant role in determining health inequalities. To sum up, a comprehensive health care system is required in order to meet sustainable development and to narrow health inequalities in China. Socio-economic, environmental and other factors make significant contributions to determine older people’s health outcomes. As China is undergoing top-down social reform, health inequalities are widening. Promoting balance among different groups of older people is a principal challenge for Chinese society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→