Home-care utilization within the year of death: trends, predictors and changes in access equity during a period of health policy reform in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Healthcare policy reforms enacted through the 1990s explicitly endorsed expanded community care and enhanced equitable access to care. We examine end-of-life home-care service utilization during this time period. We are interested in trends in and predictors of utilization influencing receipt of service or total service use. This is a population-based, retrospective study of home-care utilization by adults 50 years of age and older in British Columbia, Canada, who died in the last 6 months of each year from 1991 to 2000 (n = 98,327). Data were drawn from the British Columbia Linked Health Data resource; we examined both receipt and extent of care, using logistic and standard regression models. Independent variables included year of death, age, gender, area of residence and income quintile. Year of death was not significantly associated with receipt of home care in general. However, the odds of receiving home support services declined significantly over time, while annual home support hours increased. In contrast, receipt of home nursing increased, while annual home nursing visits did not change. Social factors frequently emerged as significant predictors of both receipt and extent of care. However, we found only limited evidence for interactions between these factors and year of death acting as determinants of receipt or extent of service. Results suggest that end-of-life home care services did not expand, but instead were reallocated and intensified over the 1990s. As well, there was little evidence to suggest enhanced equity in access to care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".