MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123596282 · doi:10.46747/cfp.6701e31

Patients eligible and referred for bariatric surgery in southeastern Ontario

2021· article· en· W3123596282 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Barber, Rachael Morkem, Nancy Dalgarno, Robyn L. Houlden, Karen Smith, Mehran Anvari, Boris Zevin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Family Physician · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralBody mass indexLogistic regressionRetrospective cohort studyObesityOdds ratioCohortPsychological interventionMedical recordPediatricsEmergency medicineFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Abstract</h3> <h3>Objective</h3> To evaluate the proportion of eligible individuals, within one health region in Ontario, who were referred for publicly funded medical and surgical weight-loss interventions (MSWLI). <h3>Design</h3> A retrospective cohort study that used primary care data from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) and referral data from the Ontario Bariatric Network (OBN). <h3>Setting</h3> Primary care practices within southeastern Ontario that contribute data to CPCSSN. <h3>Participants</h3> Patients with class II (body mass index [BMI] 35.0 to 39.9 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) or III (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) obesity who were eligible for referral to the OBN for MSWLI. <h3>Main outcome measures</h3> Primary care data about patients within the CPCSSN database were linked to referral records within the OBN database using 3 indirect identifiers to determine the proportion of patients with class II and III obesity who were referred to the OBN for MSWLI. An adjusted multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the most significant predictors of referral. <h3>Results</h3> Of the 87 276 patients within one health region in Ontario, 15 526 (17.8%) patients had class II or III obesity and were eligible for referral for MSWLI. Only 966 out of those 15 526 (6.2%) patients were actually referred for MSWLI. In the multivariate regression analysis, BMI had the strongest association with referral in terms of adjusted odds ratio (AOR), varying from 2.50 (95% CI 2.04 to 3.06) for a BMI of 40.0 to 44.9 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, to 5.15 (95% CI 4.21 to 6.30) for a BMI of 50.0 kg/m<sup>2</sup> or greater. Referral was more likely for female than male patients (AOR = 2.18; 95% CI 1.86 to 2.57), those living rurally than for urban dwellers (AOR = 1.39; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.60), and those aged 30 to 39 (AOR = 1.61; 95% CI 1.24 to 2.09) and 40 to 49 (AOR = 1.53; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.98) compared with other age groups. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Within one health region in Ontario, the referral rate of patients with class II and III obesity for MSWLI was low. Our findings highlight the need for further research to understand and address the barriers to referral of patients with class II and III obesity for MSWLI.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Family PhysicianSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207