Reduced incidence of diabetes during the <scp>COVID</scp> ‐19 pandemic in Alberta: A time‐segmented longitudinal study of Alberta's Tomorrow Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To characterize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes diagnosis using data from Alberta's Tomorrow Project (ATP), a population-based cohort study of chronic diseases in Alberta, Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ATP participants who were free of diabetes on 1 April 2018 were included in the study. A time-segmented regression model was used to compare incidence rates of diabetes before the COVID-19 pandemic, during the first two COVID-19 states of emergency, and in the period when the state of emergency was relaxed, after adjusting for seasonality, sociodemographic factors, socioeconomic status, and lifestyle behaviours. RESULTS: Among 43 705 ATP participants free of diabetes (65.5% females, age 60.4 ± 9.5 years in 2018), the rate of diabetes was 4.75 per 1000 person-year (PY) during the COVID-19 pandemic (up to 31 March 2021), which was 32% lower (95% confidence interval [CI] 21%, 42%; p < 0.001) than pre-pandemic (6.98 per 1000 PY for the period 1 April 2018 to 16 March 2020). In multivariable regression analysis, the first COVID-19 state of emergency (first wave) was associated with an 87.3% (95% CI -98.6%, 13.9%; p = 0.07) reduction in diabetes diagnosis; this decreasing trend was sustained to the second COVID-19 state of emergency and no substantial rebound (increase) was observed when the COVID-19 state of emergency was relaxed. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 public health emergencies had a negative impact on diabetes diagnosis in Alberta. The reduction in diabetes diagnosis was likely due to province-wide health service disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Systematic plans to close the post-COVID-19 diagnostic gap are required in diabetes to avoid substantial downstream sequelae of undiagnosed disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".