Waiting for a Specialist Consultation for a New Condition in Ontario: Impacts on Patients' Lives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As leading barriers to specialist care, wait times are at the forefront of the Canadian healthcare policy agenda. However, knowledge is limited about how wait times affect patients' lives. We utilized the 2010 Canadian Community Health Survey to examine the experience of patients requiring a consultation with a medical specialist for a new condition. Multivariate logistic regression predicted the likelihood that a respondent self-reported his or her life was affected. Subsequent cross-tabulations determined the ways in which life was affected. Females, middle-aged respondents, new immigrants and those with low income and poor health status were more likely to report their life was affected. Worry, stress and anxiety were the most frequently reported impacts, followed by pain, stress on family/friends, deterioration of health and loss of work. Our research demonstrates a need to address the impacts of wait times on health and well-being, with a focus on particular subpopulation groups.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 it