Effects of Rurality and Geographical Distance on Unplanned Emergency Department Utilization for Children With Asthma: A Population Level Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is a highly prevalent chronic disease among Ontario children; however, the extent to which rural status and distance are associated with unplanned emergency department (ED) use by this population is largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of rurality and geographical distance to primary and specialist care services on healthcare utilization by analyzing the use of unplanned ED services. METHODS: A population level retrospective cohort study of Ontario children ages 5-14 with newly diagnosed asthma was conducted using health administrative data from Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES). Adjusted logistic regression models were used to analyze the association between unplanned ED use with rural status and distance to general practitioner/family physician (GP/FP) and specialist healthcare services, while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: In total, 19,732 individuals met the inclusion criteria. Individuals who lived in rural locations (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.64-2.44) and travelled >50 km to a GP/FP (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06-1.48) or specialist (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05-1.38) were more likely to utilize an ED. CONCLUSION: Children with asthma utilize healthcare services differently based on rural status and distance to services. To ensure equitable access to care, there is a need to accommodate for these factors in the planning and provision of asthma healthcare 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".