ArticleCJEM2025
Emergency department visits among First Nations female adults in Alberta: a population-based study.
Article in CJEM, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEmergency departments (EDs) serve as a critical first access point for receiving healthcare for many First Nations members. However, ED experiences differ between First Nations and non-First Nations patients. Our objective is to quantify differences in ED visit characteristics for First Nations female and non-First Nations female adult patients in Alberta.
methodsWe used healthcare administrative data from April 1, 2012 until March 31, 2017 linked to First Nations identifying data. We included all female patients aged 18-54 with ED encounters in Alberta, Canada. We extracted patient characteristics (e.g., age, gender, First Nations status) and ED visit characteristics (e.g., day of week, acuity, diagnosis, disposition). Descriptive statistics were calculated for each of the population groups (i.e., First Nations female and non-First Nations female patients). Mixed effects modeling statistical analyses were conducted to account for clustering when assessing for significant differences between population groups.
resultsFirst Nations female patients who had ≥ 1 ED visit used the ED more compared to non-First Nations female patients (median 5, [IQR 2, 10]) vs. (median 2, [IQR 1, 4]), and a higher proportion of First Nations female visits resulted in admission (6.0% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.0001). First Nations female patients had a higher proportion of their visits diagnosed as related to unspecific findings, infection, cancer, obstetrical conditions, substance misuse/addictions, and mental health.
conclusionFindings suggest a lack of access to culturally safe primary and specialty care that would allow treatment in community and support discharge from acute care. ED providers must understand the conditions that underly First Nations women's visits to take a culturally safe approach that does not blame patients for the number or type of ED visits they require.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.