A Population-Based Analysis of the Discrepancy Between Potential and Realized Access to Trauma Center Care
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In Brief Objective: To explore whether a discrepancy between the availability of trauma services (potential access) and trauma center utilization rates (realized access) exists, with the aim of informing strategies to improve access. Background: Lack of access to trauma center care has frequently been attributed to the geographic distribution of trauma centers. Alternatively, impeded access to trauma center care might be due to suboptimal triage practices in the setting of appropriate resources. Methods: Population-based retrospective cohort study of severely injured adult patients (2002–2010). Potential access to trauma center care was evaluated using network-based spatial analysis of census data and was defined as residing within 1 hour of a trauma center. Realized access to trauma center care was evaluated using population-based data sources and was defined as direct transport from the scene of injury to a trauma center. Concordance between potential and realized access (high, moderate, or low) was evaluated at the county level. Results: Of the population in the study region, 7,340,711 persons (60%) had potential access to trauma center care; persons in 11 counties (22%) had high potential access. Of 26,861 severely injured patients, 10,237 (38%) had realized access to trauma center care; patients in only 4 counties (8%) had high realized access. The concordance between potential and realized access was moderate (weighted κ = 0.49); 63% of counties (n = 7) with high potential access performed worse than expected and had moderate or low realized access. Conclusions: There is limited concordance between potential and realized access. Regions with high potential access had low realized access, and vice versa. This evaluation suggests that strategies to improve access must be based on understanding the distribution of centers and the triage practices used to access trauma care. A significant proportion of severely injured patients receive definitive care at nontrauma centers. Impediments to accessing trauma center care might be either because of limited availability on account of the geographic distribution of centers or because of suboptimal triage practices in the setting of appropriate resources. In this population-based analysis, we show that the simultaneous evaluation of the availability of trauma services and triage practices can better inform strategies to improve access to care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».