MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408546352 · doi:10.1186/s12874-025-02531-3

Evaluating methods to define place of residence in Canadian administrative data and the impact on observed associations with all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes

2025· article· en· W4408546352 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle K. Nagy, Lauren Bresee, Dean T. Eurich, Scot H. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Research Methodology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceGerontologyType 2 diabetesMedicineDemographyDiabetes mellitusSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An individual’s location of residence may impact health, however, health services and outcomes research generally use a single point in time to define where an individual resides. While this estimate of residence becomes inaccurate when the study subject moves, the impact on observed associations is not known. This study quantifies the impact of different methods to define residence (rural, urban, metropolitan) on the association with all-cause mortality. A diabetes cohort of new metformin users was identified from administrative data in Alberta, Canada between 2008 and 2019. An individual’s residence (rural/urban/metropolitan) was defined from postal codes using 4 different methods: residence defined at 1-year before first metformin (this served as the reference model), comparison 1- stable residence for 3 years before first metformin, comparison 2– residence as time-varying (during the outcome observation window), and comparison 3 - nested case control (residence closest to the index date after identifying cases and controls). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression models were constructed to examine the association between residence definitions and all-cause mortality. We identified 157,146 new metformin users (mean age of 55 years and 57% male) and 8,444 (5%) deaths occurred during the mean follow up of 4.7 (SD 2.3) years. There were few instances of moving after first metformin; 2.6% of individuals moved to a smaller centre (metropolitan to urban or rural, or urban to rural) and 3.1% moved to a larger centre (rural to urban or metropolitan, or urban to metropolitan). The association between rural residence and all-cause mortality was consistent (aHR:1.18; 95%CI:1.12–1.24), regardless of the method used to define residence. The method used to define residence in a population of adults newly treated with metformin for type 2 diabetes has minimal impact on measures of all-cause mortality, possibly due to infrequent migration. The observed association between residence and mortality is compelling but requires further investigation and more robust analysis. There is growing evidence describing the impact of where an individual lives on their health. However, most of these studies identify place of residence at a single point in time and do not consider when a person moves. This could result in misclassification, which could over- or underestimate the influence of residence on health outcomes. In this study, residence was defined with 4 different methods: at 1-year before starting metformin for type 2 diabetes; stable residence for 3-years before starting metformin; accounting for changes in residence after being newly treated with metformin for type 2 diabetes; and near the end of the study at death or the end of follow up. The results of this study describe that individuals rarely move after treatment initiation with metformin for type 2 diabetes and that living in a rural area has a higher risk of death from any cause, further investigation into the latter is required. Individuals rarely move after treatment initiation with metformin for type 2 diabetes. In population-based cohort studies of adults with type 2 diabetes, classifying place of residence at baseline, 1-year prior to the index date is reasonable. The increased mortality of rural residents requires further investigation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.330
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.330
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.841
GPT teacher head0.694
Teacher spread0.147 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Research MethodologySame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207