Aging, Sexual Orientation, and Neighbourhood Deprivation: CLSA and CANUE data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there are increasing discussions regarding the sexual minority population’s aging through social work and public health perspectives, the information about this vulnerable population beyond the interpersonal level analysis still needs more growth. Hence, the current study utilized the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging and Canadian Urban Environmental Health Research Consortium data to explore a neighbourhood deprivation levels of aging sexual minority people’s living environments. Neighbourhood social and material deprivation levels were observed to determine whether there is a difference when compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Analysis of covariance was used and each analysis included age as a covariate. Gender stratification was considered in this study. The study’s results found that aging homosexual and bisexual men resided in more socially deprived neighbourhoods compared to their heterosexual peers. Similarly, aging homosexual and bisexual women reported that they reside in more socially deprived neighbourhood compared to their heterosexual counterparts. The study provides a critical information regarding the aging sexual minority population in Canada. Such knowledge can help design and disseminate behavioural and policy interventions in deprived neighbourhoods.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".