MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2535159115 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2016.06.2054

P3‐388: Trends in Health System use by Persons with Dementia in Ontario from 2007 and 2013: A Population‐Based Study

2016· article· en· W2535159115 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susan E. Bronskill, Erika Yates, Marian J. Vermeulen, Jun Guan, Xuesong Wang, Jennifer Walker, David Harvey, Philip Caffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsAlzheimer Society of CanadaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesLaurentian UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineGerontologyComorbidityPopulationDemographyQuality of life (healthcare)Long-term careEnvironmental healthPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dementia contributes to nursing home admission and, for quality of life and cost saving reasons, health systems are interested in expanding services to support living at home longer. The study objectives were to describe the level and trend in health care service use by community-dwelling adults with dementia in Ontario. Population-based, repeated cross-sectional cohorts of community-dwelling adults aged 40 years and older with pre-existing dementia were identified on April 1st of each year from 2007 to 2013 using a validated algorithm in linked administrative data. Persons with dementia were compared to a 1:1 matched control group based on age, sex, geographic region and comorbidity level. Trends in yearly rates of health service use were assessed using regression models for serially correlated data. Rates accounted for transitions from the community (long-term care placement (LTC) and death). Community-dwelling persons with dementia were more likely than matched controls to be placed in LTC (11.8% vs. 1.5% in 2013; p<0.001) and use home care (45.8% vs 23.2%; p<0.001) but equally likely to visit family physicians (93.9% vs. 94.8% in 2013) and specialists (87.1% vs. 89.4%). Overall, LTC placement decreased slightly among community-dwelling persons with dementia, from 13.3% to 11.8% between 2007 and 2013 (p<0.001), while the proportion who died in the community remained stable (7.3% in 2013). Rates of personal/homemaking home care increased over time (41.6 to 67.9 visits per person-year; p<0.001), rates of family physician visits decreased (14.1 to 12.3 visits per person-year; p<0.001) and rates of acute care (0.39 to 0.40 hospitalizations per person-year) remained stable. Trends were similar for matched controls. These data suggest rates of LTC placement may be declining while access to home care appears to be growing. Health care service utilization in other sectors is similar to matched controls. Further research is required to understand transitions to LTC and optimizing care in the community for persons with dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes→French-language works237,207→