MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165947961 · doi:10.3109/00048670903279838

Use of Administrative Data for the Surveillance of Mood and Anxiety Disorders

2009· article· en· W2165947961 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeManitoba HealthUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthCapital District Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CarePublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsAnxietyMoodMood disordersPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There is increasing interest in the use of administrative data for surveillance and research in Australia. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of such data for the surveillance of mood and anxiety disorder using databases from the following Canadian provinces: British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. METHOD: A population-based record-linkage analysis was done using data from physician billings and hospital discharge abstracts, and community-based clinics using a case definition of ICD-9 diagnoses of 296.0-296.9, 311.0, and 300.0-300.9. RESULTS: The prevalence of treated mood and/or anxiety disorder was similar in Nova Scotia, British Columbia, and Ontario at approximately 10%. The prevalence for Quebec was slightly lower at 8%. Findings from the provinces showed consistency across age and sex despite variations in data coding. Women tended to show a higher prevalence overall of mood and anxiety disorder than men. There was considerably more variation, however, when treated anxiety (300.0-300.9) and mood disorders (296.0-296.9, 311.0) were considered separately. Prevalence increased steadily to middle age, declining in the 50s and 60s, and then increased after 70 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative data can provide a useful, reliable and economical source of information for the surveillance of treated mood and/or anxiety disorder. Due to the lack of specificity, however, in the diagnoses and data capture, it may be difficult to conduct surveillance of mood and anxiety disorders as separate entities. These findings may have implications for the surveillance of mood and anxiety disorders in Australia with the development of a national network for the extraction, linkage and analysis of administrative data.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.167 · 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