Resources and population served: a description of the Ontario Paediatric Diabetes Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Network of Ontario Pediatric Diabetes Programs was established in 2001 to provide access to specialized pediatric diabetes care. Universal funding for pediatric insulin pump therapy has been available in Ontario since 2006. The objective of this study was to describe the distribution of patients, resources and insulin pump use across centres within the network, now called the Ontario Paediatric Diabetes Network. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in 2012 of the 35 pediatric diabetes centres in Ontario to measure centre characteristics, patient volume and available clinical and social resources. We used health administrative data from the provincial Assistive Devices Program to describe patients aged 18 years or less using insulin pumps by centre as a measure of technology uptake. RESULTS: All 35 centres participated, reporting a total of 6676 children with type 1 diabetes and 368 with type 2 diabetes. Most (> 80%) children with type 1 diabetes were followed at tertiary (n = 5) or large community (n = 14) centres. Nursing patient load was similar between centre types, but there was a large range across centres within any type. Overall, percent insulin pump use was 38.1% and varied widely across centres (5.3%-66.7%). Funded 24-hour support for pump users was available at 5 (36%) small community centres, 3 (19%) large community centres and 2 (40%) tertiary centres. INTERPRETATION: Our study showed differences in access to specialized and after-hours care for children with diabetes in Ontario. Pump use varied widely across centres. Further research is needed to assess the impact of these observed differences on quality of care and outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".