Influence of overweight and obesity on physician costs in adolescents and adults in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study purpose was to perform an obesity cost-of-illness analysis for individuals living in the province of Ontario, Canada. The participants consisted of a representative sample of 25 038 adults and 2440 adolescents (aged 12-17 years) who participated in the 2000/2001 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS). The CCHS data set includes measures of body mass index (BMI) (classified as normal weight, overweight or obese) and relevant covariates (age, income, smoking, alcohol, physical activity). The CCHS data set was linked to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan providers' database to obtain physician costs for 2002-2003. A two-part modelling approach was used to calculate and compare the average annual physician cost according to BMI. After adjusting for the covariates, physician costs were not significantly higher in overweight men and women compared with those with a normal weight. Physician costs were 14.7% higher in obese men and 18.2% higher in obese women than in men and women with a normal weight. Average physician costs were comparable in normal-weight and overweight/obese adolescents ($233 per year in both groups). Because Ontario operates a publicly funded healthcare system, the findings of this study have relevance for other provinces/states and countries that operate similar healthcare systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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".