Impact of comprehensive care on health care use among a cohort of marginalized people living with hepatitis C in Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The majority of new hepatitis C (HCV) cases occur among people who inject drugs. In recent years, multidisciplinary models of HCV treatment have emerged that demonstrate successful treatment outcomes for this population, as well as broad positive individual- and system-level impacts. Our objective was to evaluate changes in health care use among a cohort of people living with HCV before and after engagement with one such program. Methods: = 103) were evaluated using linkages with administrative data for the 2 years before and after program initiation. Data were evaluated using negative binomial regression models with a covariance structure to account for within-individual correlations. Results: Of participants, 72.8% were men (mean age 47 years), and 38% experienced high rates of physical and mental health comorbidity (Aggregated Diagnosis Group score ≥10). Female clients had significantly fewer ED visits 2 years after program initiation (5.04 versus 3.12; risk ratio [RR] 0.61 [95% CI 0.44% to 0.86%]). ED visits for infectious diseases and soft tissue injury were significantly lower for the cohort overall (RRs 0.58 0.51 [95% CIs 0.35% to 0.95% and 0.29% to 0.90%], respectively). Conclusion: Co-locating HCV treatment within comprehensive primary care and harm reduction services appears to have benefits beyond HCV, including a reduction in ED visits among women and a decrease in ED visits for soft tissue infections for all participants.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".