A portrait of primary care use in community dwelling persons with dementia in Quebec between 2018 and 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context As the population ages, access and continuity of primary care with the family physician are crucial for managing the complex health needs of persons with dementia. However, there is still a gap in understanding who has access to primary care and who maintains continuity of care. Objective To provide a comprehensive overview of primary care use among community-dwelling persons with dementia in Quebec from 2018 to 2020. Specifically, this study aims to identify the proportion and characteristics of individuals with dementia who had no primary care visits and those who had at least one visit with a family physician within a year and to describe the characteristics of persons with dementia who experienced low continuity of care during the same period. Study Design and Analysis This is a retrospective cohort study of persons using Quebec’s health administrative data. Population Studied Community-dwelling persons aged 65 and older with a prevalent diagnosis of dementia on March 1st of 2018, 2019, and 2020. Measures Age, sex, time since the dementia diagnosis, comorbidity, mortality, use of home care, social and material deprivation, racialization, and rurality were included. Continuity of primary care was measured using the Bice-Boxerman index on March 1st for those who had at least two visits. Results On March 1st of 2018, 2019, and 2020, Quebec saw 66,295, 67,995, and 69,665 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 and older with a diagnosis of dementia, respectively. 60.8%, 60.2%, and 58.8% of the individuals in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively, had more than one visit to a family physician. Around 30% of these individuals had low continuity of care each year. Those with low continuity of care tended to have a higher average number of visits. A higher proportion of individuals with low continuity of care received their visits in public funded and tended to live in the rural area, highlighting an interesting demographic divide. Conclusion This study presents a portrait of primary care use among community-dwelling persons with dementia in Quebec. Certain characteristics stand out among those who do not use primary care and have low continuity of care. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of visits and the continuity of care were maintained. Further research is needed to understand factors influencing care continuity and its impact on the health of individuals with dementia over time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".