Characteristics and residence of First Nations patients and their use of health care services in Saskatchewan, Canada: informing First Nations and Métis health services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: In Canada, Aboriginal people, particularly First Nations experience significant health disparities and a lower health status compared with the non-Aboriginal population. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the demographic and clinical characteristics of First Nations patients admitted to hospitals in Saskatchewan, and the acute care services used by First Nations compared with non-First Nations, specifically hospital length of stay. Primary residence of patients was also mapped to determine geographic patterns that would inform health service provision. METHODS: A retrospective medical chart audit was carried out to collect data on patient demographics and clinical characteristics of 203 First Nations and 200 non-First Nations patients admitted to two urban hospitals in Saskatchewan from 2012 to 2014. RESULTS: The most common reason for admission of First Nations and non-First Nations patients was infection (24.6%) and cardiology conditions (19.5%), respectively. There was no significant difference in mean length of stay for First Nations (10.44 days) compared with non-First Nations (10.57 days). After adjusting for age, mean length of stay for First Nations was nearly 3 days longer than non-First Nations. First Nations patients' residence was from across the broad geography of Saskatchewan, with 45% living in rural communities or on reserve. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of this study are clinically meaningful and support the need for research, in collaboration with Aboriginal patients and families, to further examine and improve the care experience in order to decrease health disparities for Aboriginal patients in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".