MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034092626 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050609

Socioeconomic status and the utilization of diagnostic imaging in an urban setting

2005· article· en· W2034092626 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
S. Demeter

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusConfidence intervalHealth carePediatricsMagnetic resonance imagingRelative riskMedical imagingFamily medicineRadiologyEnvironmental healthPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In publicly funded health care systems, the utilization of health care services should be equitable, irrespective of socioeconomic status (SES). Although the association between SES and health care utilization has been examined in Canada relative to surgical, cardiac and preventive health care services, no published studies have specifically explored the association between SES and diagnostic imaging. METHODS: We examined over 300,000 diagnostic imaging claims made in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority between Apr. 1, 2001, and Mar. 31, 2002. Using patient postal codes, we assigned SES on the basis of average household incomes in Canada's 1996 census. Using multiple regression, we examined the association between income quintile, patient age group (< or =16, 17-64, > or = 65 years), patient morbidity level according to the Johns Hopkins University Adjusted Clinical Group method (high, moderate, low), and imaging modality (general radiology, vascular, computed tomography, magnetic resonance, and general and obstetric ultrasound). RESULTS: Relative rates (RR) of diagnostic imaging utilization (highest v. lowest income quintile) were significantly increased in pediatric and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels receiving general radiology (highest RR 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-2.93); pediatric and adult patient groups at high and low morbidity levels and elderly patient groups at low morbidity levels receiving general ultrasound (highest RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.20-4.26); pediatric and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels and elderly patients at high and moderate morbidity levels receiving magnetic resonance imaging (highest RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.78- 3.52); and adult patient groups at all morbidity levels receiving computed tomography (highest RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.35- 1.59). A lower RR of diagnostic imaging utilization in the highest income quintile was found only among patients receiving obstetric ultrasound (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87). No significant associations were found among elderly patients receiving general radiology or computed tomography or adult patients receiving vascular imaging. INTERPRETATION: We found a pattern of increased diagnostic imaging utilization in patient groups with a higher SES. Further research is needed to better understand the nature of this finding and how it contributes to health outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207