Maternal Disability and Emergency Department Use for Infants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Infants have among the highest rates of emergency department (ED) visits of all age groups. Women with disabilities experience significant social disparities, may experience barriers accessing child primary care, and may seek care in the ED. Objective: To compare ED use among newborns and infants (hereafter infants) of women with or without disabilities, overall and by timing and acuity of the ED visit. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study analyzed data for all live-born infants in Ontario, Canada, born to women with or without a disability from April 1, 2008, to March 31, 2021. Data were analyzed March 2023 to October 2024. Exposure: Maternal physical, sensory, or intellectual or developmental disability or multiple disabilities status was ascertained using diagnostic algorithms applied to health care encounters before delivery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was any ED visit between an infant's hospitalization discharge date and their first birthday, and by timing and acuity. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to generate hazard ratios (HRs) for the association between maternal disability and the main outcome, adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and infant sex and year of birth. Results: Of 1 596 932 total infants, there were 139 698 (8.7%) born to women with a physical disability, 48 112 (3.0%) to women with a sensory disability, 2547 (0.2%) to women with an intellectual or developmental disability, and 10 312 (0.6%) to women with multiple disabilities. The remaining 1 396 263 infants (87.4%) were born to a woman without a recognized disability. Among women without a disability, 558 965 infants (40.0%) had an ED visit in the first year of life (incidence rate, 1.11 per 1000 person-days). Compared with this referent group, infants born to a woman with a disability of a physical (46.9%; 1.30 visits per 1000 person-days; adjusted HR [AHR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.13-1.15]), sensory (45.2%; 1.25 visits per 1000 person-days; AHR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.07-1.10]), or intellectual or developmental (55.4%; 1.55 visits per 1000 person-days; AHR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.17-1.30]) nature or with multiple disabilities (51.0%; 1.42 visits per 1000 person-days; AHR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.15-1.22]) were more likely to have an ED visit. Similar patterns were observed for ED visits at fewer than 28 days from delivery, from 28 to 365 days, and for ED visits for high-acuity, moderate-acuity, and low-acuity reasons. Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, infants of women with disabilities were more likely to use the ED, indicating a need for accessible family supports and improved early child primary care access.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».