MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134466492 · doi:10.2105/ajph.93.5.798

Markers of Access to and Quality of Primary Care for Aboriginal People in Ontario, Canada

2003· article· en· W2134466492 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Baiju R. Shah, Nadia Gunraj, Janet E. Hux

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusReferralPrimary carePopulationCohortAmbulatory careDemographyFamily medicineEnvironmental healthGerontologyHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated primary care accessibility and quality for Ontario's aboriginal population. METHODS: We compared a defined aboriginal cohort with nonaboriginal populations with analogous geographic isolation and low socioeconomic status. We determined rates of hospitalization for the following indicators of adequacy of primary care: ambulatory care-sensitive (ACS) conditions and utilization of referral care-sensitive (RCS) procedures from administrative databases. RESULTS: ACS hospitalization rates, relative to the general population, were 2.54, 1.50, and 1.14 for the aboriginal population, the geographic control populations, and the socioeconomic control populations, respectively. The relative RCS procedure utilization rates were 0.64, 0.91, and 1.00, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The increased ACS hospitalization rate and reduced RCS procedure utilization rate suggest that northern Ontario's aboriginal residents have insufficient or ineffective primary 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations147
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207