ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
Neighbourhood, family and health care.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disparities in socioeconomic status and neighborhood characteristics affect all-cause mortality in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension in Korea: a nationwide cohort study, 2002-2013.International journal for equity in health · 2016Article
- Adolescent outcomes and opportunities in a Canadian province: looking at siblings and neighbors.BMC public health · 2014Article
- An evaluation of access to health care services along the rural-urban continuum in Canada.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Does it matter what you measure? Neighbourhood effects in a canadian setting.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe effects of family and place on health outcomes may be seriously misestimated by standard analytic techniques. The information-rich settings in several Canadian provinces can provide appropriate designs to minimize biases resulting from omitted variables and measurement error. This paper compares siblings with children living in the same neighbourhood (but not in the same family) in terms of health care utilization and health care costs. A complete history of residential mobility since birth permits an estimate of the effects of exposure to different environments.
methodsRegistry data from a Manitoba cohort born between 1978 and 1985 and continuously resident in the province generated a large sample of same-sex siblings and neighbours (N = 18,280). Administrative information on physician billings, hospital inpatient stays, and costs provided data on utilization between ages 12 and 17.
resultsLarge effects on the outcome variables were associated with being in the same family (correlations up to 0.50), whereas the correlations representing upper limits on neighbourhood effects were usually small. These neighbourhood correlations typically shrank slightly after adjustment for family effects. Higher neighbour correlations with utilization (particularly ambulatory visits) occurred in rural Manitoba and probably reflect variation in access to care. Higher correlations are associated with relatively small neighbourhoods and with families remaining in the neighbourhood for at least 17 years. DISCUSSION: Although specific variables taken from administrative data are only marginally predictive, our results emphasize the importance of "family" in affecting health care utilization in Manitoba. The minimal effects of neighbourhood differ from those found by investigators generally using weaker designs and emphasizing the significance of neighbourhood.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18047161PMC6976095What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.