{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01845342706502636, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0017574692442882249, 'mean_word_length': 5.7, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Age-standardised mortality and proportional mortality analyses of aboriginal and non-aboriginal deaths in metropolitan, rural and remote areas.

The study's aim was to assess how much of the variation in disease-specific mortality between metropolitan, rural and remote areas is specific to those diseases or reflects the all-cause mortality pattern. The ranges and variances of disease-specific standardised proportional mortality ratios between geographical areas were compared to those of the corresponding standardised mortality ratios. For most chapters in the International Classification of Diseases, the ranges and variances of the standardised proportional mortality ratios were less than 40% of those of the corresponding standardised mortality ratios. Only a small proportion of the variation in mortality can therefore be attributed to a specific disease component; the remainder must be attributed to an underlying 'force of mortality'. Research, programs and policies addressing the socio-economic disadvantages of living in remote areas may lead to a greater improvement in mortality than those targeting specific diseases.