Evaluating health disparities in a pediatric population with type 1 diabetes in Quebec
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Few Canadian studies have examined the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and glycemic control while considering other equity measures such as ethnicity, immigration, and other factors that modify the relationship between SES and glycemic control. My main objective was to determine the association between SES and glycemic control (HbA1c) in children ages 0-18 years with type 1 diabetes (T1D) followed at the Montreal Children’s Hospital (MCH). My secondary objectives were to 1)determine whether insulin pump use, processes of care (number of diabetes-related clinic visits), and depression were effect modifiers of this relationship and 2)to determine the association between ethnicity or immigration status with mean HbA1c. Retrospective cohort study using MCH’s Pediatric Diabetes Database with data on children ages 0-18 years with T1D. A Diabetes Clinical Intake Form was used for demographic information such as ethnicity, immigration status, and depression. We included children diagnosed with T1D for at least a year with an index visit between November 1st 2019 and October 31st 2020. The main outcome was mean HbA1c in the year following the index visit. The main exposure was SES measured by the Material and Social Deprivation Index. SES was also measured by the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation (CIMD) which examines residential instability, situational vulnerability, economic dependency, and ethnocultural composition (a measure of ethnic density). SES was defined as Q1-Q2(least deprived), Q3(moderately deprived), and Q4-Q5(most deprived). I used multivariable linear regression to determine the association between SES and mean HbA1c adjusting for age, sex, and diabetes duration, insulin pump use, and processes of care. Effect modification by insulin pump, processes of care (number of diabetes-related clinic visits in the past year) and depression was assessed with interaction terms in three separate regression models. We used multivariable linear regression analysis to determine the association between ethnicity, immigration and mean HbA1c adjusted for SES, age, sex, diabetes duration, insulin pump use, and processes of care. A total of 203 children were included in the main analysis. Mean age was 13.5 years; 53.2% males, and mean diabetes duration was 4.9 years. The sample consisted of 47.3%, 26.6%, and 26.1% in the least, moderately, and most deprived quintiles, respectively. Children in the most deprived quintiles had a higher mean HbA1c compared to those in the least and moderately deprived (p=.05). In the adjusted analysis, HbA1c in the most deprived quintiles was 0.5% higher compared to the least deprived (95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.05-0.97). Effect modification by insulin pump, processes of care, and depression was not significant. The CIMD assigned quintiles for 208 children. The ethnocultural composition was associated with lower mean HbA1c in moderately and most diverse quintiles compared to least diverse quintiles (β =-1.1, 95%CI -1.9,-0.4, β=-0.8, 95% CI -1.5,-0.2). In terms of ethnicity, the racialized compared to the non-racialized group had a higher mean HbA1c (β=0.7, 95%CI 0.2-1.2). Consistent with previous findings, lower SES was associated with higher HbA1c; effect modification by insulin pump, processes of care, and depression was not observed. We observed ethnic disparities in HbA1c levels, which is consistent with previous data from the UK and the U.S. Although the racialized compared to the non-racialized group was associated with higher HbA1c, the most diverse compared to the least diverse neighborhood-level ethnocultural composition was associated with lower mean HbA1c. This suggests that other health-promoting factors in areas of high ethnocultural composition may affect HbA1c, such as social cohesion and community support. The associations between SES and glycemic control are important for further research to understand drivers that contribute to disparities in a Canadian context
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».