Integrating population-wide laboratory testing data with physician audit-and-feedback reports to improve glycemic and cholesterol control among Ontarians with diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionImproving the care and management of patients with diabetes, particularly those with extreme blood glucose and/or cholesterol levels, has been identified as a key priority area for healthcare in Ontario. A multi-organizational collaboration produces audit-and-feedback reports distributed to consenting primary care physicians across the province for quality improvement purposes. Objectives and ApproachWe examined the feasibility of linking the Ontario Laboratory Information System (OLIS), a large and nearly population-wide database of laboratory test results in Ontario, with the existing provincial audit-and-feedback reporting structure to integrate aggregated, physician-level measures of glycemic and cholesterol control among patients with diabetes. All Ontario residents alive on March 31, 2014, attached to a primary care physician, and diagnosed with diabetes for at least two years were included. These patients were linked to OLIS to extract laboratory test orders and results for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) and low-density lipoproteins (LDL) between April 1, 2013 and March 31, 2014. ResultsThere were 1,108,530 diabetes patients included who were assigned to 10,085 primary care physicians. During fiscal year (FY) 2013, 70%, 64%, and 59% of diabetes patients were tested for HbA1C, LDL, and both measures, respectively. Among the 648,238 diabetes patients with at least one of each test in FY2013, 13% had a HbA1C test exceeding a threshold of 9%, 4% had a LDL test exceeding a threshold of 4 mmol/L, and 0.8% exceeded both thresholds. At the physician-level, the median (Interquartile Range) proportions of diabetes patients exceeding the testing thresholds were 12% (9%-16%) for HbA1c and 4% (2%-6%) for LDL. In a multilevel logistic regression model, there was significant between-physician variability in the proportions of diabetes patients exceeding the HbA1C (p Conclusion/ImplicationsWe developed a mechanism for integrating population-wide, clinical laboratory test results into physician audit-and-feedback reports to improve diabetes care in Ontario. Significant variation observed in the aggregated, physician-level proportions of diabetes patients testing above clinical thresholds for HbA1C and LDL highlights the importance of reporting such information to physicians.
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 | 0.011 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".