MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7057043188

The Impact of Rurality and Geography on Healthcare Service Access for Children with Asthma

2019· dissertation· en· W7057043188 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersQueen's UniversityOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsRuralityHealth careLogistic regressionAsthmaRural areaPopulationDescriptive statisticsCohortBivariate analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Asthma is a highly prevalent chronic disease amongst the Ontario pediatric population; however, the extent to which rural status and distance are associated with unplanned emergency department (ED) use by this population is largely unknown. Objective: To explore the impact of rurality and geographical distance to services on healthcare utilization by analyzing the use of general practitioner/family physician (GP/FP), specialist and unplanned ED services. Methods: A population level retrospective cohort study of Ontario children ages 5-14 with newly diagnosed asthma was conducted using health administrative data from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES). Bivariate descriptive statistics were used to assess healthcare use depending on rurality and distance to services. Adjusted logistic regression models were used to analyze the association between unplanned ED use with rural status and distance to GP/FP and specialist healthcare services, while controlling for confounders. Results: In total, 19,732 individuals met the inclusion criteria. Rurality and geographical distance to services were significantly associated with GP/FP, specialist and unplanned ED use. Rural participants were more likely to visit a GP/FP (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.50-2.01) and less likely to visit a specialist (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.49-0.64) in comparison to urban participants. Distance to a GP/FP or specialist was weakly associated with the number of healthcare provider visits; rs=-0.04 and rs=-0.09 respectively. Individuals who lived in rural locations (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.64-2.44) and travelled >50km to a GP/FP (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06-1.48) or specialist (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05-1.38) were more likely to utilize an ED. Conclusion: Children with asthma utilize healthcare services differently based on rural status and distance to services. Rural children were more likely to utilize GP/FP services, less likely to utilize specialist services and more likely to have an unplanned ED visit when compared to urban children. Children who resided further (>50km) from a healthcare provider were less likely to have a GP/FP or specialist visit when compared to those who resided closer (≤50km). To ensure equitable access to care, there is a need to accommodate for these factors in the planning and provision of asthma healthcare services.

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)0.000
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 score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→