Rurality is associated with lower likelihood of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor use for treatment intensification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Antihyperglycemic drug utilization studies are conducted frequently and describe the uptake of new drug therapies across may jurisdictions. An increasingly important, yet often absent, aspect of these studies is the impact of rurality on drug utilization. Objectives: The objective of this study was to explore the association between place of residence (rural, urban, metropolitan) and the use of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) for first treatment intensification of type 2 diabetes. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2019 of new metformin users. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association between place of residence (using postal codes) and likelihood of DPP-4i dispensing. Results: After adjusting for confounders, analysis revealed that rural-dwellers are less likely to have a DPP-4i dispensed, compared with metropolitan-dwellers (aOR:0.64; 95%CI:0.61-0.67) and over-time, the uptake in rural areas was slower. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that rurality can have an impact on drug therapy decisions at first treatment intensification, with respect to the utilization of new therapies.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".