Looking beyond Administrative Health Care Data: The Role of Socioeconomic Status in Predicting Future High-cost Patients with Mental Health and Addiction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Previous research has shown that the socioeconomic status (SES)-health gradient also extends to high-cost patients; however, little work has examined high-cost patients with mental illness and/or addiction. The objective of this study was to examine associations between individual-, household- and area-level SES factors and future high-cost use among these patients. METHODS: We linked survey data from adult participants (ages 18 and older) of 3 cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey to administrative health care data from Ontario, Canada. Respondents with mental illness and/or addiction were identified based on prior mental health and addiction health care use and followed for 5 years for which we ascertained health care costs covered under the public health care system. We quantified associations between SES factors and becoming a high-cost patient (i.e., transitioning into the top 5%) using logistic regression models. For ordinal SES factors, such as income, education and marginalization variables, we measured absolute and relative inequalities using the slope and relative index of inequality. RESULTS: = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.66), at the individual and household levels, respectively, and higher residential instability (OR = 1.72, 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.42, for most marginalized), at the area level, were associated with higher odds of becoming a high-cost patient within a 5-year period. Moreover, the inequality analysis suggested pro-high-SES gradients in high-cost transitions. CONCLUSIONS: Policies aimed at high-cost patients with mental illness and/or addiction, or those concerned with preventing individuals with these conditions from becoming high-cost patients in the health care system, should also consider non-clinical factors such as income as well as related dimensions including food security and homeownership.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".