MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128381827 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.150234

Association between household food insecurity and annual health care costs

2015· article· en· W2128381827 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Valerie Tarasuk, Joyce Cheng, Claire de Oliveira, Naomi Dachner, Craig Gundersen, Paul Kurdyak

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Work & HealthInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFood insecurityMedical prescriptionMedicineEnvironmental healthHealth careConfidence intervalHousehold incomePrescription drugFood securityGerontologyDemographyGeographyAgricultureEconomic growthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Household food insecurity, a measure of income-related problems of food access, is growing in Canada and is tightly linked to poorer health status. We examined the association between household food insecurity status and annual health care costs. METHODS: We obtained data for 67 033 people aged 18-64 years in Ontario who participated in the Canadian Community Health Survey in 2005, 2007/08 or 2009/10 to assess their household food insecurity status in the 12 months before the survey interview. We linked these data with administrative health care data to determine individuals' direct health care costs during the same 12-month period. RESULTS: Total health care costs and mean costs for inpatient hospital care, emergency department visits, physician services, same-day surgeries, home care services and prescription drugs covered by the Ontario Drug Benefit Program rose systematically with increasing severity of household food insecurity. Compared with total annual health care costs in food-secure households, adjusted annual costs were 16% ($235) higher in households with marginal food insecurity (95% confidence interval [CI] 10%-23% [$141-$334]), 32% ($455) higher in households with moderate food insecurity (95% CI 25%-39% [$361-$553]) and 76% ($1092) higher in households with severe food insecurity (95% CI 65%-88% [$934-$1260]). When costs of prescription drugs covered by the Ontario Drug Benefit Program were included, the adjusted annual costs were 23% higher in households with marginal food insecurity (95% CI 16%-31%), 49% higher in those with moderate food insecurity (95% CI 41%-57%) and 121% higher in those with severe food insecurity (95% CI 107%-136%). INTERPRETATION: Household food insecurity was a robust predictor of health care utilization and costs incurred by working-age adults, independent of other social determinants of health. Policy interventions at the provincial or federal level designed to reduce household food insecurity could offset considerable public expenditures in health care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations329
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207