MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281901221 · doi:10.2337/db22-1241-p

1241-P: Cross-Sectional Study of the Impact of the COVID-Pandemic on Diabetes Management in Primary Care in Ontario, Canada

2022· article· en· W4281901221 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
ALICE Y. CHENG, Stewart B. Harris, IRIS E. KRAWCHENKO, Richard Tytus, Jina Hahn, AIDEN R. LIU, YANG WANG, SHANE GOLDEN, Ronald Goldenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicinePrimary careSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Family medicineCross-sectional studyHealth careTest (biology)DiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study describes the impact of the pandemic on the management of people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D) in a primary care network with existing virtual care capabilities in Ontario, Canada. Methods: Using de-identified primary care electronic medical records, PwT2D who had at least one healthcare touchpoint between March 1, 2018 and February 28, 2021 were analyzed by time period (baseline: 2018-19, pre-COVID-19: 2019-20, COVID-19: 2020-21) . The primary outcome measures include the number of people with at least one visit, number of people with vital measurements or lab tests, and the vital or lab results. Results: The three time periods had a similar average age and gender distribution (Table 1) . Compared to the pre-COVID-period, fewer people had any healthcare touchpoint (17% reduction) . In-person visits were reduced while more people had virtual visits. Fewer people had test results recorded during the COVID-vs. two pre-COVID-time periods, however, average results were similar across all three time periods. Conclusion: Our study described the immediate impact of the COVID-pandemic on patterns of primary care for PwT2D. While the total number people getting tests remains below pre-pandemic levels, of those who sought care, the mean A1c, LDL-c and eGFR were comparable across the three time periods. 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. 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. 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. Y.Wang: Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. S.Golden: Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk Canada 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.

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)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207