Profiles of healthcare use of persons living with dementia: A population‐based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Persons living with dementia are a heterogeneous population with complex needs whose healthcare use varies widely. This study aimed to identify the healthcare use profiles in a cohort of persons with incident dementia, and to describe their characteristics. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of health administrative data in Quebec (Canada). The study population included persons who: (i) had an incident dementia diagnosis between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016; (ii) were aged ≥65 years and living in the community at the time of diagnosis. We carried out a latent class analysis to identify subgroups of healthcare users. The final number of groups was chosen based on clinical interpretation and statistical indicators. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 15 584 individuals with incident dementia. Four profiles of healthcare users were identified: (i) Low Users (36.4%), composed of individuals with minimal healthcare use and fewer comorbidities; (ii) Ambulatory Care-Centric Users (27.5%), mainly composed of men with the highest probability of visiting cognition specialists; (iii) High Acute Hospital Users (23.6%), comprised of individuals mainly diagnosed during hospitalization, with higher comorbidities and mortality rate; and (iv) Long-Term Care Destined Users (12.5%), who showed the highest proportion of antipsychotics prescriptions and delayed hospitalization discharge. CONCLUSIONS: We identified four distinct subgroups of healthcare users within a population of persons living with dementia, providing a valuable context for the development of interventions tailored to specific needs within this diverse population. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 789-796.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".