MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205332651 · doi:10.1177/10105395211072497

Determinants of Health Service Utilization Among Adults at High Risk of Developing Type 2 Diabetes in Kerala, India

2022· article· en· W4205332651 on OpenAlexaffabout
Phoebe Hone, Jim Black, Thirunavukkarasu Sathish, Nitin Kapoor, Yingting Cao, Tilahun Haregu, Kavumpurathu Raman Thankappan, Brian Oldenburg

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Journal of Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionPopulationOdds ratioHealth careGerontologyEnvironmental healthQuarter (Canadian coin)Social determinants of healthPublic healthNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine the determinants of health service utilization in a population at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus in India. Using Andersen's behavioral model of healthcare utilization, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on baseline data of the Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program. We examined the association between predisposing, enabling, and need factors with outpatient health service use in the past four weeks and inpatient health service use in the past 12 months. More than a quarter (27.9%) and 12.9% of 1007 participants used outpatient services and inpatient services, respectively. Men were less likely to use outpatient services (odds ratio [OR] = 0.56). Outpatient service utilization was positively associated with low social support (OR = 1.69), low general health status (OR = 5.71), and time off from work due to illness (OR = 8.01). Higher educational status (OR = 0.63), low general health status (OR = 3.59), and time off from work due to illness (OR = 1.21) were associated with increased utilization of inpatient services. Although gender, educational status, and social support had important roles, health service utilization in this study population was largely dependent on general health status and presence of illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific Journal of Public HealthSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207