Community‐Acquired Pneumonia in Patients Receiving Home Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the features of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requiring hospitalization in subjects receiving home care. DESIGN: Prospective study from November 15, 2000, to November 14, 2002. SETTING: Six hospitals in the Edmonton, Canada, area. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand four hundred sixty-four subjects aged 17 years and older with CAP, 21.9% of whom were receiving home care. MEASUREMENTS: Pneumonia attack rates, demographic features, severity of illness, medication, length of stay, mortality, in hospital complications, and time to achieve physiological stability. RESULTS: The overall rate of CAP requiring a visit to an emergency department in home care recipients was 25 per 1,000 person years, 90.8% of whom were admitted to the hospital for treatment. Patients who were receiving home care at the time of admission were older and less likely to be current tobacco smokers, had higher in-hospital mortality (11%) and a longer length of stay, were receiving more medications, and had more comorbidity and fewer symptoms except for shortness of breath and altered mental state than those who were not receiving home care. Home care patients had four times as many myocardial infarctions and recurrent aspiration as the non-home care patients. Falls occurred five times more often, and urinary catheters were inserted twice as often. Except for oxygen saturation, time to achieve physiological stability was the same for the two groups of patients. Half (51.2%) of the home care patients passed the get-up-and-go test, compared with 75% (P<.001) of the non-home care patients. CONCLUSION: Home care patients with CAP had an 11% mortality rate and a higher rate of complications than those who did not receive home care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".