Increasing rates of diabetes amongst status Aboriginal youth in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To track and compare trends in diabetes rates from 1995 to 2007 for Status Aboriginal and general population youth. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal observational research study (quantitative) using provincial administrative data. METHODS: De-identified data was obtained from Alberta Health and Wellness administrative databases for Status Aboriginal (First Nations and Inuit people with Treaty status) and general population youth (<20 years). Diabetes cases were identified using the National Diabetes Surveillance System algorithm. Crude annual diabetes prevalence and incidence rates were calculated. The likelihood of being a prevalent case and incident case of diabetes for the 2 populations was compared for the year 2007. Average Annual Percent Changes (AAPC) in prevalence and incidence from 1995 to 2007 were determined and compared between the 2 groups to examine trends over time. RESULTS: While the prevalence of diabetes was higher in the general population in 1995, by 2007 there were no between group differences, reflected in the significantly higher AAPC of 6.98 for Status Aboriginal youth. Status Aboriginal males had a lower diabetes risk in 1995 compared with females, and experienced a greater increase in prevalence over the 13 years (AAPC 9.18) so that by 2007 their rates were equivalent to those of the females. Differences in diabetes incidence trends were only observed among male youth, where increases in incidence were greater for Status Aboriginal (AAPC 11.65) compared to general population males (AAPC 4.62) (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Youth-onset diabetes is an increasing problem in Alberta, especially among young Status Aboriginal males.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".