MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4316036312 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067689

Examining the immediate and ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population-based estimates of dementia: a population-based time series analysis in Ontario, Canada

2023· article· en· W4316036312 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aaron Jones, Susan E. Bronskill, Laura C. Maclagan, Liisa Jaakkimainen, David H. Kirkwood, Alexandra Mayhew, Andrew P. Costa, Lauren E. Griffith

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityImpactInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CarePublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineDementiaIncidence (geometry)PandemicDemographyPopulationEpidemiologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cumulative incidenceGerontologyDiseaseEnvironmental healthCohortInfectious disease (medical specialty)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Population-based chronic disease surveillance systems were likely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to examine the immediate and ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the claims-based incidence of dementia. METHODS: We conducted a population-based time series analysis from January 2015 to December 2021 in Ontario, Canada. We calculated the monthly claims-based incidence of dementia using a validated case ascertainment algorithm drawing from routinely collected health administrative data. We used autoregressive linear models to compare the claims-based incidence of dementia during the COVID-19 period (2020-2021) to the expected incidence had the pandemic not occurred, controlling for seasonality and secular trends. We examined incidence by source of ascertainment and across strata of sex, age, community size and number of health conditions. RESULTS: The monthly claims-based incidence of dementia dropped from a 2019 average of 11.9 per 10 000 to 8.5 per 10 000 in April 2020 (32.6% lower than expected). The incidence returned to expected levels by late 2020. Across the COVID-19 period there were a cumulative 2990 (95% CI 2109 to 3704) fewer cases of dementia observed than expected, equivalent to 1.05 months of new cases. Despite the overall recovery, ascertainment rates continued to be lower than expected among individuals aged 65-74 years and in large urban areas. Ascertainment rates were higher than expected in hospital and among individuals with 11 or more health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The claims-based incidence of dementia recovered to expected levels by late 2020, suggesting minimal long-term changes to population-based dementia surveillance. Continued monitoring of claims-based incidence is necessary to determine whether the lower than expected incidence among individuals aged 65-74 and in large urban areas, and higher than expected incidence among individuals with 11 or more health conditions, is transitory.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts→French-language works237,207→