Decreasing Use of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Feeding for Veterans with Dementia—Racial Differences Remain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is a widely used method for long-term enteral feeding of demented patients unable to take sufficient food by mouth. National time trends in PEG tube use over the last decade have not been previously reported. The objective of this study was to determine whether use of PEG tubes for patients with dementia has changed over time and by race. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: All Veterans Affairs hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Using an administrative database of the Veterans Health Administration, all veterans with dementia and all veterans who received a PEG tube were identified between fiscal years 1990-2001. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of PEG tube placement for dementia patients over time and by race. RESULTS: Four hundred thirteen thousand six hundred twenty-seven dementia patients aged 60 and older were identified, of whom 6,464 (1.6%) received a PEG tube. Use of PEG tubes for dementia patients increased during the first half of the decade but subsequently decreased almost to baseline after peaking in 1996 (1990: 1.2%, 1996: 1.8%, 2001: 1.3%). Time trends in the use of PEG tube feeding for dementia patients varied by race. Specifically, the relative risk for PEG tube placement in African-American dementia patients increased from 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI)=1.25-2.17, FY 1990) to 1.97 (95% CI=1.62-2.4, FY 2001). CONCLUSION: Although the overall use of PEG tube feeding for dementia patients decreased over time, rates in use and changes in use over time varied significantly by race. Reasons for the differential use of this procedure should be explored.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".