<p>Factors associated with waiting times for persons with rheumatic conditions in multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities</p>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Access to multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MPTF) in Canada is limited by long waiting lists. However, little is known about the factors associated with access to MPTF specifically for persons with rheumatic conditions. This study aimed to 1) determine the waiting time for services in publicly funded MPTF for persons with rheumatic conditions in the province of Quebec, Canada, as well as 2) identify the factors associated with waiting time. METHODS: This study was conducted using the Quebec Pain Registry, a large database of patients who received pain management services in MPTF. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were assessed for potential associations with waiting time. Descriptive, bivariate analyses and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 3,665 patients with rheumatic conditions were identified within the registry. Patients had a mean age of 55±14 years and the majority were women (65.7%). The average waiting time was 241.2±308.9 days (median=126), with 34.2% of the patients waiting longer than 6 months before having a first appointment. Results indicate that longer pain duration, lower household income, pain onset following a motor vehicle accident, having fibromyalgia, being on permanent disability or unemployed and being referred by a family physician (versus specialist) were significantly associated with longer waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with rheumatic conditions (especially fibromyalgia) face long delays before receiving services in Quebec's MPTF. This study identified several factors associated with waiting time and emphasizes the need to improve access to pain management services.
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 | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".