Social determinants of access to timely elective surgery in Ontario, Canada: a cross-sectional population level study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Equitable access to surgical care has clinical and policy implications. We assess the association between social disadvantage and wait times for elective surgical procedures in Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using administrative data sets of adults receiving nonurgent inguinal hernia repair, cholecystectomy, hip arthroplasty, knee arthroplasty, arthroscopy, benign uterine surgery and cataract surgery from April 2013 to December 2019. We assessed the relation between exceeding target wait times and the highest versus lowest quintile of marginalization dimensions by use of generalized estimating equations logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 1 385 673 procedures included, 174 633 (12.6%) exceeded the target wait time. Adjusted analysis for cataract surgery found significantly increased odds of exceeding wait times for residential instability (adjusted odd ratio [OR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.21) and recent immigration (adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.18). The highest deprivation quintile was associated with 18% (adjusted OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.12-1.24) and 20% (adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12-1.28) increased odds of exceeding wait times for knee and hip arthroplasty, respectively. Residence in areas where higher proportions of residents self-identify as being part of a visible minority group was independently associated with reduced odds of exceeding target wait times for hip arthroplasty (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.91), cholecystectomy (adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.79) and hernia repair (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56-0.77) with an opposite effect in benign uterine surgery (adjusted OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17-1.40). INTERPRETATION: Social disadvantage had a small and inconsistent impact on receiving care within wait time targets. Future research should consider these differences as they relate to resource distribution and the organization of clinical service delivery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".