MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403567081 · doi:10.1177/21501319241284971

Characteristics and Healthcare Utilization of Canadians Living With Participation and Activity Limitations (2001-2010): A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4403567081 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dan Wang, Jessica J. Wong, Sheilah Hogg‐Johnson, Silvano Mior, Pierre Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Primary Care & Community Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversity of Toronto
FundersHealth CanadaOntario Chiropractic Association
KeywordsMedicineHealth careDisadvantagedCross-sectional studyPoisson regressionPopulationEnvironmental healthGerontologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with participation and activity limitations face important healthcare challenges. OBJECTIVES: We investigated healthcare utilization and characteristics of Canadians living with participation and activity limitations between 2001 and 2010. METHODS: We pooled data from 5 cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey (2001-2010 CCHS). The multistage stratified cluster-sampling method used covered approximately 98% of Canadians, aged 12 years and older residing in private dwellings. We described sociodemographic, behavioral, and health-related characteristics of participants with participation and activity limitations and reported their annual utilization (prevalence; 95% CI) of 7 healthcare providers. Multivariable modified Poisson regression identified individual characteristics associated with healthcare utilization and examined the trends over time. RESULTS: Annually, 8.1 million Canadians aged 12 years and older (29.8%) reported participation and activity limitations. Most common health conditions were back problems (37%) and arthritis (34%). Predominant healthcare providers were medical doctors (88.8%; 95% CI = 88.6-89.0), nurses (16.3%; 95% CI = 16.1-16.6), physiotherapists (15.0%; 95% CI = 14.7-15.2), and chiropractors (14.4%; 95% CI = 14.2-14.7). Overall, males, older adults, immigrants, those with lower education, lower income, recent employment, and better general health were less likely to consult providers. Over time, utilization of most non-medical providers increased. CONCLUSION: Participation and activity limitations are prevalent in Canada, and most consulted medical doctors. Disadvantaged groups reported lower utilization of most providers, emphasizing access challenges and the need for equitable and integrated healthcare policies. Improving access to rehabilitation services and their inclusion within universal healthcare coverage should be a priority.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.269
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Primary Care & Community HealthSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207