Rural and Urban Canadians with Dementia: Use of Health Care Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to examine the characteristics of older Canadians with dementia (compared to those without dementia), their use of health care services, and the impact of place (rural/urban) on use of services. Andersen and Newman's Behavioural Model of Health Services Use (1973) guided the study. A cross-sectional design used data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) Cycle 1.1 (N=49,995 older Canadians; those with dementia=313). Results indicated that among Canadian females between the ages of 50 and 64, those with dementia were more likely than those without dementia to live in rural areas. Among females 80 years of age and over, those with dementia had higher levels of education and income than those without dementia. In addition, a higher proportion of white than of visible minority Canadians was afflicted with dementia. The results further suggest that Canadians with dementia primarily required support services and that they were more likely than persons without dementia to report that their health care needs were unmet. It is recommended that publicly funded national home care programs be expanded to ensure that the supportive services needed by this population are available.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".