ICES Report: The Growing Prevalence of Diabetes in Ontario: Are We Prepared?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Issue The number of persons with diabetes worldwide has increased dramatically over the past 20 years, making it one of the most burdensome diseases of our time. It is one of the leading causes of blindness and end-stage renal disease, and an important cause of cardiovascular complications. Furthermore, the treatment is complex and costly, with the direct healthcare costs of diabetes ranging from 2.5 to 15% of health budgets. Rates of diabetes are expected to continue to increase over time. The World Health Organization (WHO) predicted that the global diabetes prevalence rate among adults would reach 6.4% by 2030, representing a 60% increase since 1995 and a 39% rise from 2000. However, these projections may be underestimates as they were based on an unwarranted assumption that obesity rates would remain constant. In a recent study, scientists at Ontario’s Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) described trends in diabetes prevalence, incidence and mortality in Ontario, from 1994/95 (April 1, 1994 to March 31, 1995) to 2004/05 (April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2005). The Growing Prevalence of Diabetes in Ontario: Are We Prepared?
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".