Amoebic liver abscess in USA: a population‐based study of incidence, temporal trends and mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amoebic liver abscess (ALA) may be associated with significant morbidity and mortality, but nationwide American data is unavailable. Our objective was to describe ALA epidemiology and outcomes in USA from a population-based perspective. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with ALA between 1993 and 2007 were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes including mortality were determined. The annual incidence of ALA and temporal trends were determined using the negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: Between 1993 and 2007, 848 hospitalizations for ALA, corresponding to ∼4100 hospitalizations nationwide, were identified. The annual incidence was 1.38 per million population with a 2.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0-4.8%; P=0.06] average annual decline during this study. Most patients were hospitalized in western (54%) and southern states (27%), and 48% were Hispanic. Males (incidence rate ratio vs. females: 4.53; 95% CI 4.19-4.90) had the highest incidence rates. Percutaneous and surgical drainage was required in 48 and 7% of patients respectively. Although length of stay [median, 6 days; interquartile range (IQR) 4-10] and hospital charges (US$25,345; IQR US$15,030-42, 275) were substantial, in-hospital mortality was rare (0.8%). Females [odds ratio (OR) 6.12; CI 1.39-26.8], patients ≥ 60 years (OR 13.3; 95% CI 2.5-71.5), and those with ≥ 3 comorbidities (OR 5.80; 95% CI 1.30-25.8), particularly malnutrition, had an increased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: ALA is rare and the incidence has decreased in USA. Young, Hispanic males in southwestern states are most frequently affected. Mortality caused by ALA is lower than what was reported previously.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".