Public Pensions and Elderly Mortality in Canada: Comparing Means tested
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the impact of three public pension programs on the mortality rates of recipient age groups in Canada. The Old Age Pension (OAP), introduced in 1927 for Canadians over age 70, and Old Age Assistance (OAA), implemented in 1952 for Canadians aged 65–69, were means tested programs while Old Age Security (OAS), introduced in 1952 for Canadians over age 70, was a universal plan. Our data consist of age-specific mortality rates and pension information, by province, for the period 1921– 1966. The three dimensional feature of this panel allows us to exploit variation in policy implementation dates across provinces, and changes in income and age group eligibility. We find that the implementation of all three pension programs resulted in statistically significant reductions in recipient age group mortality rates and that the effect of the federal universal OAS of 1952 was twice as large as either of the means tested plans. However, the number of lives extended with the universal OAS was small and the estimated cost per life extended large.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".