MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038196727 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201205-0949oc

Disparities in Access to Lung Transplantation for Patients with Cystic Fibrosis by Socioeconomic Status

2012· article· en· W2038196727 on OpenAlexafffund
Bradley S. Quon, Kevin J. Psoter, Nicole Mayer-Hamblett, Moira L. Aitken, Christopher I. Li, Christopher H. Goss

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesUniversity of British ColumbiaBritish Columbia Lung AssociationNational Institutes of HealthCystic Fibrosis Foundation
KeywordsMedicineMedicaidSocioeconomic statusOdds ratioLung transplantationConfidence intervalTransplantationInternal medicineCystic fibrosisDemographyPediatricsGerontologyPopulationHealth careEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Although previous studies suggest that access to care for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) does not vary appreciably by socioeconomic status (SES), disparities with respect to access to lung transplantation for patients with CF are largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether access to lung transplantation for patients with CF differs according to SES. METHODS: Observational study involving 2,167 adult patients with CF from the CF Foundation Patient registry who underwent their first lung transplant evaluation between 2001 and 2009. The primary outcome was acceptance for lung transplant after initial evaluation. The main SES indicator was Medicaid status. Alternate SES indicators included race, educational attainment, ZIP code-level median household income, and driving time from residence to closest lung transplant center. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The odds that Medicaid recipients were not accepted for lung transplant were 1.56-fold higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.92) than patients without Medicaid, after multivariate adjustment for demographic characteristics, disease severity, and potential contraindications to lung transplant, and before or after use of the lung allocation score. This association was independent of other SES indicators, including race, educational attainment, ZIP code-level median household income, and driving time to closest transplant center (odds ratio [OR] = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.10-1.72). Patients not completing high school (OR = 2.37; 95% CI, 1.49-3.79) and those residing in the lowest (vs. highest) ZIP code median household income category (OR = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.01-1.93) also experienced a higher odds of not being accepted for lung transplant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationally representative study of adult patients with CF, multiple indicators of low SES were associated with higher odds of not being accepted for lung transplant.

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)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations98
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207