Abstract P053: Increment And Stabilization Of Diabetes Prevalence In The Province Of Quebec, Canada: A Combination Of Lower Mortality And Incidence In Older Adults Only
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: In the last decade, an increase in the prevalence and a reduction in the incidence of diabetes have been observed in many countries including Canada. Yet, some Canadian provinces depicted an elevation in incidence rates among younger age groups. Our objective was to document these trends in the province of Quebec from fiscal years 2001 to 2017. Hypothesis: Prevalence is increasing because of raising incidence in individuals aged <50 years. Methods: Prevalence, incidence and all-cause mortality among cases of diabetes ≥20 years were assessed using the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System (n=6,551,045 in 2017). Estimations were age-standardized or stratified by 10-year age groups. Results: In 2017, the crude prevalence and incidence of diabetes were 9.9% [99% confidence interval: 9.9-10.0] (n=651,370) and 6.0 per 1,000 inhabitants [5.9-6.0] (n=35,355), respectively. Between 2001 and 2017, the age-standardized prevalence increased by 43% (6.3% [6.3-6.3] to 9.0% [9.0-9.1]), while age-standardized incidence decreased by 29% (8.3 per 1,000 [8.2-8.4] to 5.9 per 1,000 [5.9-6.0]). In every age group, the prevalence increased steadily with progressive stabilization from 2011 and onward, except for the 60-69 years old group who depicted a reduction from 2012 to 2017. Incidence remained stable among <50 years old, while it decreased for ≥50 years (-26%, -33%, -36% for 50-59, 60-69 and ≥70 years old, respectively) (Figure 1). Age-standardized mortality among adults with diabetes decreased by 24% (20.7 per 1,000 [20.1-21.3] to 15.8 per 1,000 [15.4-16.3]). Mortality rates decreased by 27% among the 40-49 years old, with greater reductions in older age groups (-28%, -35%, -34% in the 50-59, 60-69 and ≥70 years, respectively). Conclusions: The rise and stabilization of diabetes prevalence could be due to a reduction in incidence in patients aged ≥50 years and mortality among all age groups. Prevention of diabetes should be a priority among individuals aged <50 years as diabetes incidence is not decreasing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".