Diabetes transition care and adverse events: a population‐based cohort study in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To describe patterns of primary and diabetes care during transition age (17 to < 19 years) into early adulthood (age 19 to 26 years), and to evaluate the association of primary and diabetes care patterns during transition age with the risk of adverse events in early adulthood. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of individuals in Ontario, Canada who were diagnosed with diabetes aged < 15 years and who turned 17 between November 2006 and March 2011, followed until March 2015 (n = 2525). Using linked administrative databases, we examined healthcare use during: 'pre-transition-age' (15 to < 17 years), 'transition-age' (17 to < 19 years), and 'early adulthood' (19 to 26 years). The main outcomes were time to death or ketoacidosis and rate of diabetes-related admissions. The main exposures were the gap in diabetes care and primary care visits during transition age. RESULTS: There were < 6 deaths and 446 individuals (17.7%) had at least one admission for ketoacidosis during early adulthood. In all, 1188 individuals (47.0%) had a > 12-month gap in diabetes care and 241 (9.5%) had no primary care visits during transition age. A gap in diabetes care of > 12 months and no primary care visits during transition age were associated with an increased risk of ketoacidosis or death (adjusted hazard ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.66 and adjusted hazard ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.97, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In Ontario, Canada, where physician and hospital-based services are universally covered, a high proportion of young adults with diabetes have insufficient care during transition age and this is associated with a higher risk of important adverse outcomes in early adulthood. Ensuring primary care involvement during transition may be a strategy to reduce morbidity.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".