Osteoporosis management and fractures in the Métis of Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Half of Métis citizens, compared to less than 10 % of the general population of Ontario, reside in northern regions, with little access to bone mineral density (BMD) testing. Métis citizens had lower sex-specific and age-standardized rates of BMD testing, yet similar rates of fracture (both sexes) and pharmacotherapy (women only). PURPOSE: To examine osteoporosis management and common osteoporosis-related fractures among Métis citizens compared to the general population of older adults residing in Ontario. METHODS: We linked healthcare (medical and pharmacy) utilization and administrative (demographic) databases with the Métis Nation of Ontario citizenship registry to estimate osteoporosis management (bone mineral density [BMD] testing, pharmacotherapy) and fractures (hip, humerus, radius/ulna) among adults aged ≥50 years, from April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2011. Pharmacotherapy data were limited to residents aged ≥65 years. Sex-specific and age-standardized rates were compared between the Métis and the general population. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare rates of BMD testing after controlling for differences in age and region of residence between the Métis and the general population. RESULTS: We studied 4219 Métis citizens (55 % men), and 140 (3 %) experienced a fracture. Half of Métis citizens, compared to less than 10 % of the general population of Ontario, resided in northern regions. We identified significantly lower sex-specific and age-standardized rates of BMD testing among Métis compared to the general population, yet found little difference in fracture rates (both sexes) or pharmacotherapy (women only). Differences in BMD testing disappeared after adjusting for region of residence among women yet remained significant among men. CONCLUSIONS: Despite finding significantly lower rates of osteoporosis management among men, Métis men and women were found to have similar age-standardized fracture rates to the general population.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".