MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283362767 · doi:10.1177/26335565221106074

Multimorbidity matters in low and middle-income countries

2022· review· en· W4283362767 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ana Basto‐Abreu, Tonatiuh Barrientos‐Gutiérrez, Alisha N. Wade, Daniela Oliveira de Melo, Ana Sara Semeão de Souza, Bruno Pereira Nunes, Arokiasamy Perianayagam, Maoyi Tian, Lijing L. Yan, Arpita Ghosh, J. Jaime Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Multimorbidity and Comorbidity · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilInter-American Institute for Global Change ResearchNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaWorld Diabetes FoundationGrand Challenges CanadaBloomberg PhilanthropiesWellcome TrustFogarty International CenterNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAlliance for Health Policy and Systems ResearchSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungMetLife Foundation
KeywordsComparabilityRepresentativeness heuristicMultimorbidityPandemicLow and middle income countriesHealthcare systemMedicineHealth careEnvironmental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GeographyEconomic growthDiseaseDeveloping countryPsychologyPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimorbidity is a complex challenge affecting individuals, families, caregivers, and health systems worldwide. The burden of multimorbidity is remarkable in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) given the many existing challenges in these settings. Investigating multimorbidity in LMICs poses many challenges including the different conditions studied, and the restriction of data sources to relatively few countries, limiting comparability and representativeness. This has led to a paucity of evidence on multimorbidity prevalence and trends, disease clusters, and health outcomes, particularly longitudinal outcomes. In this paper, based on our experience of investigating multimorbidity in LMICs contexts, we discuss how the structure of the health system does not favor addressing multimorbidity, and how this is amplified by social and economic disparities and, more recently, by the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that generating epidemiologic data around multimorbidity with similar methods and definition is essential to improve comparability, guide clinical decision-making and inform policies, research priorities, and local responses. We call for action on policy to refinance and prioritize primary care and integrated care as the center of multimorbidity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations105
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Multimorbidity and ComorbiditySame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207