Relation between primary care physician supply and diabetes care and outcomes: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Higher primary care physician supply is associated with lower mortality due to heart disease, cancer and stroke, but its relation to diabetes care and outcomes is unknown. We examined the association between primary care physician supply and evidence-based testing and hospital visits for people with diabetes in naturally occurring multispecialty physician networks in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis between Apr. 1, 2009, and Mar. 31, 2011, using linked administrative data. We included all Ontario residents over 40 years of age with a diagnosis of diabetes before Apr. 1, 2007, who were alive on Apr. 1, 2009 (N = 712 681). We tested the association between physician supply and outcomes at the network level using separate Poisson regression models for urban and nonurban physician networks. We accounted for clustering at the physician and network level and adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Patients in physician networks with a high supply of primary care physicians were more likely to receive the optimal number of evidence-based tests for diabetes than patients in networks with low primary care physician supply (urban relative risk [RR] 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.07; nonurban RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.14-1.21) but were no different regarding emergency department visits (urban RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94-1.17; nonurban RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85-1.08) or hospital admissions for diabetes complications (urban RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.89-1.14; nonurban RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77-1.07). INTERPRETATION: Having more primary care physicians per capita is associated with better diabetes care but not with reduced hospital visits in this setting. Further research to understand this relation and how it varies by setting is important for resource planning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".