Hepatitis C Virus Infection Outcomes Among Immigrants to Canada: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIM: HCV-infected immigrants contribute to the total prevalence in Canada and other developed nations. Little is known about engagement in care, access to service, and treatment outcomes in recipients of Direct Acting Antiviral (DAA) HCV therapies among immigrants living with HCV. MATERIAL AND METHODS: HCV patients assessed at The Ottawa Hospital Viral Hepatitis Clinic between 2000-2016 were identified. Immigration history, race, socioeconomic status, HCV work-up, treatment and outcome data were evaluated. HCV fibrosis assessment, treatment and sustained virologic response (SVR) were compared using logistic regression. RESULTS: 2,335 HCV-infected patients were analyzed with 91% (2114) having data on immigration (23% immigrants). A median 16 years (Quartiles: 5, 29) passed from immigration to referral. Access to diagnostic procedures (Fibroscan/liver biopsy) was greater among immigrants compared to Canadian-born (78% vs. 68%, p = 0.001) and immigrants had an odds ratio of 1.72 (95% CI: 1.18-2.51) of receiving a FibroScan compared to Canadians after adjustment for demographic characteristics, HCV risk factors, and socioeconomic status. No differences in SVR were found between immigrants for IFN recipients. Among DAA recipients, rates of SVR were > 94% among all patients, 93% in Canadian-born and 98% among immigrants (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION: Nearly 80% of immigrants in this setting had access to fibrosis assessment which was higher than Canadian-born patients. Under half of both groups had initiated HCV therapy. Delays in accessing HCV care represent a missed opportunity to engage, treat and cure HCV patients. HCV screening and health care engagement at the time of immigration would optimize HCV care and therapeutic 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".