Low income children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease have higher surgical and hospitalization rates in a Universal Health Care System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada's single-payer health system provides all residents of Ontario, Canada's largest province, with publicly-funded healthcare. Nonetheless, previous studies have demonstrated income-based disparities in health services utilization and outcomes in children with chronic diseases. To test whether there are important differences in healthcare utilization and outcomes based on household income in children with IBD. The Ontario Crohn's and Colitis Cohort uses a validated algorithm to identify all children <18 years diagnosed 1994-2004 with IBD within Ontario's health administrative databases. Children were followed until 2008. Patients were grouped into census-based mean neighborhood income quintiles groupings: the lowest two income quintiles (n= 944) and highest two income quintiles (n= 1286). Multivariable models tested the association between income group and physician and emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, or surgery. Logistic, linear or Cox proportional hazard regression models were used. Covariates were determined a priori (sex, diagnosis age) or included if they changed the estimate of the income group variable by ≥10% (incidence date, rurality at birth and at diagnosis). 2230 IBD patients were included (age at diagnosis 14.4±3.9y, follow-up 8.4±3.2y [range 3-14y]). Care providers (adult/pediatric gastroenterologists, surgeons) were similar between groups. Lower income children were more likely to be hospitalized or visit the ED and had more physician IBD-related visits (see Table). Lower income children with Crohn's (not UC) were more likely to undergo surgery within 3y of diagnosis. IBD-RELATED HEALTH SERVICES UTILIZATION BY NEIGHBORHOOD INCOME QUINTILE GROUP. In the context of higher overall physician visits in low income children with IBD, higher surgical rates in those with Crohn's disease, and higher hospitalization rates in all children with IBD are likely due to factors other than access to healthcare services. Further work should delineate whether there are potentially modifiable risk factors associated with these worse health outcomes in children of lower income families.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".