MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281844011 · doi:10.2337/db22-268-or

268-OR: Impact of the COVID-Pandemic on Antihyperglycemic Prescription Patterns in Canada

2022· article· en· W4281844011 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
ALICE Y. CHENG, Ronald Goldenberg, IRIS E. KRAWCHENKO, Richard Tytus, Jina Hahn, AIDEN R. LIU, TOMMY LAN, BRADLEY MILLSON, Stewart B. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical prescriptionMedicinePandemicFamily medicineType 2 diabetesPharmacyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Diabetes mellitusHealth careBasal insulinDiseaseInternal medicinePharmacologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)EndocrinologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: COVID-public health measures may have impacted diabetes care through delayed care and reduced medication access. This study describes antihyperglycemic medication prescription patterns among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) before and during the COVID-pandemic in Canada. Methods: Using IQVIA’s longitudinal pharmacy based prescription data, antihyperglycemic prescriptions from March 1, 2018 to February 28, 2021 were analyzed among adults who had ≥1 prescription for a non-insulin antihyperglycemic drug. The number of people who: 1) had antihyperglycemic prescriptions,2) were newly started on antihyperglycemic drugs, and3) were newly diagnosed with T2D (inferred from prescriptions) were reported. Results: The number of people who had ≥1 antihyperglycemic prescription was comparable in the year of the COVID-pandemic (March 2020 to February 2021) and the year prior (March 20to February 2020) . The number of people who newly initiated a GLP-1RA, SGLT2i or second-generation basal insulin analogue decreased for the first few months of the pandemic (April to September 2020) with recovery thereafter. The number of people who were newly diagnosed with T2D decreased by 7% in the COVID-year. Conclusion: Fewer people initiated newer antihyperglycemic medications and fewer people were newly diagnosed with T2D in the first few months for the pandemic which may reflect reduced health care access. Disclosure A.Y.Cheng: Advisory Panel; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, HLS Theraoeutics, Insulet Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Board Member; Type 1 Diabetes Think Tank Network, Other Relationship; Diabetes Canada, Speaker's Bureau; Bausch Health, Canada, Merck & Co., Inc. R.Goldenberg: Consultant; IQVIA Inc., Speaker's Bureau; Amgen Canada, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Sanofi. I.E.Krawchenko: Speaker's Bureau; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. R.Tytus: Other Relationship; Banty , Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Canadian Health Research Company, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc. J.Hahn: Employee; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. A.R.Liu: Employee; Novo Nordisk A/S, Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. T.Lan: Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. B.Millson: Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. S.B.Harris: Consultant; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Other Relationship; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer Inc., Dexcom, Eli Lilly and Company, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Research Support; Applied Therapeutics Inc., AstraZeneca, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) , Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, The Lawson Foundation.

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)0.002
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207