Use of the health care system by Ontario First Nations people with diabetes: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: First Nations people in Ontario have an increased prevalence of diabetes compared to other people in the province. This study examined use of health care services by First Nations people with diabetes and other people with diabetes in Ontario. METHODS: Using linked health administrative databases, we identified all people in Ontario with diabetes as of Apr. 1, 2014. We identified First Nations people using the Indian Register. We looked at outcomes from Apr. 1, 2014, to Mar. 31, 2015. We determined the proportion of people with a regular family physician and their continuity of care with that physician. We also examined visits with specialists for diabetes care, hospital admissions for ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions, and emergency department visits for hypo- or hyperglycemia. RESULTS: There were 1 380 529 people diagnosed with diabetes in Ontario as of Apr. 1, 2014, of whom 22 952 (1.7%) were First Nations people. First Nations people were less likely to have a regular family physician (85.3% v. 97.7%) and had lower continuity of care with that physician (mean score for continuity of care 74.6 v. 77.7) than other people in Ontario. They were also less likely to see specialists. First Nations people were more likely to be admitted to hospital for ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions (2.4% v. 1.2%) and to have an emergency department visit for hypo- or hyperglycemia (1.5% v. 0.8%). Disparities were particularly marked for those living in First Nations communities. INTERPRETATION: First Nations people with diabetes in Ontario had poorer access to and use of primary care than other people with diabetes in the province. These findings may help explain continued disparities in the rates of complications related to diabetes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".