MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205928310 · doi:10.1002/alz.055623

The impact of the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic on health service use by persons with dementia in Ontario, Canada: A population‐based time series analysis

2021· article· en· W4205928310 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susan E. Bronskill, Laura C. Maclagan, Xuesong Wang, Jun Guan, Daniel A. Harris, Peter C. Austin, Colleen J. Maxwell, Liisa Jaakkimainen, Andrea Iaboni, Connie Marras, Isabelle Vedel, Nadia Sourial, Claire Godard‐Sebillotte, Richard H. Swartz

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of WaterlooHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaPandemicCohortGerontologyPopulationCohort studyHealth careDiseaseDemographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Little has been quantified, at a population‐level, about the magnitude of heath service disruption to persons living with dementia in community settings during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Sustained access to health care services is particularly important for persons with dementia and other neurodegenerative diseases as they are vulnerable to decline. Method Health administrative data from Ontario, Canada were used to examine patterns of health service use among all persons with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (dementia) who were alive and living in the community. This cohort was compared to persons with Parkinson’s disease (PD) as well as all older adults (age 65+ years) without neurodegenerative diseases. Rates of all‐cause hospital admissions, emergency department visits, primary care and specialist physician visits and home care visits were analyzed for all individuals alive and eligible for provincial health insurance at the start of each weekly period from March 1, 2020 to September 20, 2020 (pandemic period) and from March 3, 2019 to September 22, 2019 (pre‐pandemic period). Rates of health service use during specific weeks in the pandemic period (i.e., lowest week, last available week) were compared to corresponding weeks in the pre‐pandemic period within each cohort using percent changes. Results On March 1, 2020, 128,696 persons with dementia, 30,099 with PD and 2,460,358 older adults were eligible for provincial health services. Across cohorts and services, dramatic declines in use of health services were observed at the lowest week: hospitalization (‐38.7% dementia, ‐72.3% PD, ‐44.2% older adults); emergency department (‐54.9% dementia, ‐57.7% PD, ‐53.6% older adults); home care (‐14.8% dementia, ‐19.4% PD, ‐7.4% older adults). Health services varied in how quickly they rebounded to pre‐pandemic levels within cohorts; notably, by the end of the study period, emergency department visits had increased to a level higher than corresponding 2019 weekly rates (24.2% dementia, 15.2% PD, 7.4% older adults). Conclusions The first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic meaningfully and immediately disrupted use of health care services for persons living with dementia and PD and may have resulted in long‐term consequences that should be monitored.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts→French-language works237,207→