MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116966073 · doi:10.1097/mlr.0000000000002272

Comparing Predictive Power of Area-Level Socioeconomic Status Indices Across Health Outcomes and Geographic Levels

2025· article· en· W7116966073 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Maria Rossi, Lorenzo Franchi, Natalia Barreto, Anna Chorniy, Benjamin W. Weston, John Meurer, Jeff Whittle, Ronald T. Ackermann, Bernard S. Black

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictive powerSocioeconomic statusCensus tractPredictive valueCensusRange (aeronautics)Power (physics)Value (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many researchers want to control for both individual-level demographic/health variables and area-level socioeconomic status (area-SES) when studying health outcomes. However, comparative assessments of area-SES indices across geographic levels and a range of health outcomes are scarce. OBJECTIVES: Compare predictive power for 3 commonly used area-SES indices: the Graham Social Deprivation Index (SDI), the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), and the CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), for a variety of health outcomes, at different geographic levels (county, 5-digit zip-code, census tract, and census block group). Also compare these indices to the simpler Townsend Deprivation Index (TDI) and population percent in poverty (area-Poverty). RESEARCH DESIGN: Principal research methods are logistic and ordinary least squares regression. SUBJECTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, COVID-19 decedents, and drug overdose decedents. MEASURES: SDI, SVI, ADI, TDI, area-Poverty. HEALTH OUTCOMES STUDIED: All-cause mortality, diabetes incidence and prevalence, hypertension, renal disease, and 30-day hospital readmission for Medicare beneficiaries; COVID-19 mortality; overdose mortality; Medicare fee-for-service spending. RESULTS: All measures predict the health outcomes, controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and comorbidities, at zip code, tract, and block-group levels. Predictive power is comparable for SDI, SVI, and a standardized version of ADI, and generally superior to TDI, area-Poverty, and non-standardized ADI. Predictive power is highest at tract level, similar at block-group; reasonably strong at zip code, but weaker at county level. CONCLUSIONS: Across a range of health outcomes, we find similar predictive power for SDI, SVI, and standardized ADI, ideally measured at census tract level. SDI has the value of being more parsimonious, with similar performance. Non-standardized ADI cannot be recommended.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical CareSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207