Disparities in Receipt of Bariatric Surgery in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with lower socioeconomic status (SES) in the United States have reduced access to many health services including bariatric surgery. It is unclear whether disparities in bariatric surgery exist in countries with government-sponsored universal health benefits. The authors used data from a large regional Canadian bariatric surgery referral center to examine the relationship between SES and receipt of bariatric surgery. METHODS: The Toronto Western Hospital bariatric surgery registry was used to identify all adults referred for bariatric surgery assessment from 2010 to 2017. The authors compared demographics, SES measures, and clinical measures among patients who did not and did undergo bariatric surgery (Roux-en-Y or sleeve gastrectomy). Multiple logistic regression was used to examine differences in receipt of bariatric surgery according to patient demographic characteristics and SES factors. RESULTS: Among 2417 patients included in the study, 646 (26.7%) did not receive surgery and 1771 patients (73.2%) did. Patients who did not undergo surgery were more likely to be male individual (29.1% vs. 19.3%; P<0.001), black (12.1% vs. 8.3%; P=0.005), South Asian/Middle Eastern (8.2% vs. 4.5%; P<0.001), and less likely to be white (68.9% vs. 76.7%; P<0.001). In multiple logistic regression, factors associated with not receiving surgery were male sex, Black and South Asian/Middle Eastern ethnicity, being single, lack of employment, and history of psychiatric illness. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients referred for bariatric surgery, those who were male individuals, nonwhite, single, and unemployed were less likely to undergo surgery. Our results suggest that even with equal insurance, there are disparities in receipt of bariatric surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".