MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410380966 · doi:10.1186/s12913-025-12751-4

Investigating use of diagnostic codes for post-COVID- 19 condition in Ontario health administrative data

2025· article· en· W4410380966 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joseph Munn, Clare Atzema, Peter C. Austin, Stacey J. Butler, Lee Fidler, Xuesong Wang, Andrea S. Gershon

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineDiagnosis codeOddsPopulationPublic healthLogistic regressionDemographyHealth administrationIncidence (geometry)Odds ratioHealth careHealth informaticsFamily medicineGerontologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In January 2023 the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) introduced a diagnostic code for post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). We used this code to estimate the incidence rate of PCC, to compare demographic and clinical characteristics of individuals who received a PCC code to those who didn't, and to investigate healthcare utilization of individuals who received a PCC code. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada (population approximately 15 million). Individuals who had received a PCC diagnostic code between January 2023 and January 2024 were identified using OHIP, a physician billing database. For the entire population of Ontario, crude incidence rates of PCC were computed and patient characteristics (including age, sex, geographic location, comorbidities, and marginalization index) were collected and compared between individuals who had received a PCC code and those who hadn't using logistic regression models. Healthcare utilization rates for people who received a PCC code were compared pre-pandemic (January 1st, 2017 to March 31st, 2020), pre-PCC (April 1st, 2020 to 24-weeks pre-PCC diagnostic code), and post-PCC (24-weeks pre-PCC diagnostic code to study end). RESULTS: A PCC code was received by 7,343 individuals. Median age was 62, and 60% were female. When compared to the entire population of Ontario, female sex, older adults, Northern Ontario residents, and comorbid individuals had greater odds of receiving a PCC code. People who were visible minorities, immigrants, and had less access to material resources had lower odds of receiving a PCC code. Healthcare utilization rates, pre-pandemic, pre-PCC, and post-PCC were 14.59 (CI 13.63-15.61), 27.43 (CI 25.01-30.27), and 100.61 (CI 93.39-107.73) encounters per person-year respectively. CONCLUSION: The number of cases captured was lower than what Health Canada estimates would indicate and it is likely that the code is underrepresenting PCC in Ontario. The substantial increases in healthcare utilization suggests the code is capturing severe PCC cases. The characteristics of the cohort were similar to what has been described in peer-reviewed literature, suggesting that the patients in this cohort have PCC. This code could offer a promising way to study a large diverse population of people with PCC.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services Research→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→