113 Primary care among newborns at a Canadian urban centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Twenty-five percent of Canadians living in urban communities do not have a primary care provider (PCP). Although several studies have described the primary care crisis in adults, studies in newborns are limited. Newborns require medical visits within the first few days of life to monitor for dehydration, hyperbilirubinemia, and congenital problems. Objectives Our primary objective was to examine the proportion of newborns without primary care, and the association between lack of primary care and sociodemographic factors at a large Canadian urban hospital. Design/Methods This was a cross-sectional survey conducted at a large urban hospital in Toronto. Participants included parents of newborns who delivered within one week on the post-partum ward. The primary outcome assessed was the prevalence of newborns without primary care. We examined the association between not having a PCP for newborns and family sociodemographic characteristics. Results There were 634 participants. A total of 189 (29.8%) parents reported that they did not have primary care for their newborns. Not having primary care was associated with parents being born outside of Canada (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.72-3.97), income <$75,000 (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.34-3.37), and not owning a home (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.91-4.52). Conclusion This study showed that nearly 30% of newborns at a large Canadian urban centre do not have primary care after discharge. Risk factors for not having primary care included being a newcomer, low income, and not owning a home. Given the primary care crisis in Canada, it is essential to understand the lack of access to primary care among newborns and associated risk factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".