Spatiotemporal epidemiology of substance-related accidental acute toxicity deaths in Canada from 2016 to 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In Canada, substance-related accidental acute toxicity deaths (AATDs) continue to rise at the national and sub-national levels. However, it is unknown if, where, when, and to what degree AATDs cluster in space, time, and space-time across the country. The objectives of this study were to 1) assess for clusters of AATDs that occurred in Canada during 2016 and 2017 at the national and provincial/territorial (P/T) levels, and 2) examine the substance types detected in AATD cases within each cluster. METHODS: Two years of person-level data on AATDs were abstracted from coroner and medical examiner files using a standardized data collection tool, including the decedent's postal code and municipality information on the places of residence, acute toxicity (AT) event, and death, and the substances detected in the death. Data were combined with Canadian census information to create choropleth maps depicting AATD rates by census division. Spatial scan statistics were used to build Poisson models to identify clusters of high rates (p < 0.05) of AATDs at the national and P/T levels in space, time, and space-time over the study period. AATD cases within clusters were further examined for substance types most present in each cluster. RESULTS: Eight clusters in five regions of Canada at the national level and 24 clusters in 15 regions at the P/T level were identified, highlighting where AATDs occurred at far higher rates than the rest of the country. The risk ratios of identified clusters ranged from 1.28 to 9.62. Substances detected in clusters varied by region and time, however, opioids, stimulants, and alcohol were typically the most commonly detected substances within clusters. CONCLUSION: Our findings are the first in Canada to reveal the geographic disparities in AATDs at national and P/T levels using spatial scan statistics. Rates associated with substance types within each cluster highlight which substance types were most detected in the identified regions. Findings may be used to guide intervention/program planning and provide a picture of the 2016 and 2017 context that can be used for comparisons of the geographic distribution of AATDs and substances with different time periods.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".