Geographical location of residence and uniformity of access to cardiac revascularization services after catheterization.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The centralization of health care services has numerous potential benefits but April compromise access for individuals living in remote areas. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between a patient's place of residence and the likelihood of undergoing a coronary revascularization procedure within one year after cardiac catheterization. METHODS: All Alberta residents undergoing cardiac catheterization between 1995 and 1998 were examined. Geographical distance from patient place of residence to a centralized catheterization facility was calculated. The adjusted odds of undergoing cardiac revascularization within one year of catheterization was determined as a function of distance, controlling for differences in patient age, clinical factors and economic status. RESULTS: Of 21816 residents who underwent cardiac catheterization in the province, 10997 had a revascularization procedure. Graphical examination of distance revealed a change in revascularization rates in patients living more than 450 km from revascularization centres. Further analysis was conducted using this cutpoint. Patients living in these remote areas were more likely to undergo a coronary revascularization procedure within the next year (adjusted odds ratio 1.65, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.59). However, these same residents were also less likely to undergo catheterization in the first place when compared with other Albertans (270 versus 398 procedures per 100000 population). CONCLUSION: Only a small proportion of the population living in Alberta's most remote areas were more likely to undergo a revascularization procedure, indicating a remarkable uniformity of access to revascularization after coronary cardiac catheterization has occurred. This study examines the use of an existing database to gain further insights into the relationship between geography and access to cardiac care, and the distance-access relationship for coronary revascularization in Alberta.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".