Increasing incidence and prevalence with limited survival gains among rural Albertans with diabetes: a retrospective cohort study, 1995–2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare recent trends of diabetes prevalence, incidence and mortality between men and women living in urban and rural Alberta, Canada. METHODS: We tracked population trends in diabetes in adults based on diagnostic codes from provincial administrative health records from 1995 to 2006. Location of residence was defined by registered postal codes. Sex-stratified logistic regression with interactions was used to compare increases in rates over the past decade by location of residence, adjusting for age. RESULTS: Men in rural residences had the greatest increases in prevalence, at 61%, from 3.6 per 100 in 1995 to 5.8 per 100 in 2006, compared with a 55% increase in urban men, from 3.9 per 100 in 1995 to 6.0 per 100 in 2006 (P < 0.001). Diabetes incidence in rural men increased 61% while urban men had a similar increase of 59% (P = 0.177). Incidence was lower in women in both urban and rural locations, at 5.6 and 5.3 per 1000 in 2006. Overall, mortality rates decreased by 34% for urban men and 8% for rural men with diabetes (P = 0.006). Women with diabetes in rural areas had no decline in overall mortality, compared with a 28% reduction in urban women (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes prevalence remains highest in men, with the greatest increases seen in men living in rural residences. While mortality rates have declined substantially over the past decade for those people with diabetes living in urban settings, declines in mortality in rural areas have been much more modest (for men) or non-existent (for women).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".