Early specialist care for diabetes: who benefits most? A propensity score‐matched cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To examine whether early endocrinologist care reduces the risk of cardiovascular complications among newly diagnosed patients with diabetes of differing complexity. METHODS: We conducted a population-based propensity score-matched cohort study using provincial health data from Ontario, Canada. Adults (≥ 30 years) diagnosed with diabetes between 1 April 1998 and 31 March 2006 who received endocrinologist care in the first year of diagnosis were matched to a comparison group receiving primary care alone (N = 79 020) based on propensity scores and medical complexity (assigned using information on chronic conditions). Individuals were followed for 3- and 5-year outcomes, including non-fatal acute myocardial infarction or coronary heart disease death (primary endpoint), major cardiovascular events (acute myocardial infarction, stroke) or all-cause death, amputation and end-stage renal disease. RESULTS: Among medically complex patients, early endocrinologist care was associated with a lower 3-year incidence of the primary endpoint (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.01) and major cardiovascular events or all-cause death (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97). These effects persisted after accounting for a higher incidence of end-stage renal disease on follow-up and were greatest in those with ≥ 3 visits to an endocrinologist (primary endpoint: hazard ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.86 and 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.82, for unadjusted and end-stage renal disease adjusted analyses, respectively). In contrast, no benefit was observed in the non-medically complex subgroup. Overall effects were similar at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Early endocrinologist care is associated with a lower incidence of cardiovascular events and death among newly diagnosed patients with diabetes who have comorbid medical conditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".