MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943646479 · doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4020-6

Healthcare utilization after stroke in Canada- a population based study

2019· article· en· W2943646479 on OpenAlexafffundabout
A Obembe, Lisa Simpson, Brodie M. Sakakibara, Janice J. Eng

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada Research ChairsMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Nursing researchHealth administrationHealth careRate ratioPopulationMoodAnxietyHealth informaticsCross-sectional studyPublic healthFamily medicineGerontologyDemographyPsychiatryNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: More people are surviving stroke but are living with functional limitations that pose increasing demands on their families and the healthcare system. The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which stroke survivors use healthcare services on a population level compared to people without a stroke. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional population-based survey that collected information related to health status, healthcare utilization and health determinants using the 2014 Canadian Community Health Survey. Healthcare utilization was assessed by a computer-assisted personal interview asking about visits to healthcare professionals in the last 12 months. Negative binomial regression was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the number of health professional visits between stroke survivors and people without a stroke. The regression models were adjusted for demographics, as well as for mobility, mood/anxiety disorder and cardiometabolic comorbid conditions. RESULTS: The study sample included 35,759 respondents (948 stroke, 34,811 non-stroke) and equate to 12,396,641 (286,783 stroke; 12,109,858 non-stroke) when sampling weights were applied. Stroke survivors visited their family doctor the most, and stroke was significantly associated with more visits to most healthcare professionals [e.g., family doctor IRR 1.6 (CI 1.4-1.8); nurse IRR 3.0 (CI 1.8-4.8); physiotherapist IRR 1.8 (CI 1.1-1.9); psychologist IRR 4.0 (CI 1.1-5.7)] except the dental practitioner, which was less [IRR 0.7 (CI 0.6-0.9)]. Mood/anxiety condition, but not cardiometabolic comorbid condition increased the probability of visiting a family doctor or social worker/ counsellor among people with stroke. CONCLUSION: Stroke survivors visited healthcare professionals more often than people without stroke, and were approximately twice as likely to visit with those who manage problems that may arise after a stroke (e.g., family doctor, nurse, psychologist, physiotherapist). The effects of a stroke include mobility impairment and mood/ anxiety disorders. Therefore, adequate access to stroke-related healthcare services should be provided for stroke survivors, as this may improve functional outcome and reduce future healthcare costs.

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)0.002
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207