Hospitalization for Community Acquired Pneumonia in Alberta First Nations Aboriginals Compared with Non‐First Nations Albertans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rates and outcomes of hospital admission for community-acquired pneumonia between First Nations Aboriginal and non-First Nations groups were compared. METHODS: Alberta administrative hospital abstracts from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 1999, were analyzed, and each case of a First Nations Aboriginal person with pneumonia was matched by age and sex with three non-First Nations persons with pneumonia. RESULTS: The First Nations Aboriginal age and sex-adjusted hospital discharge rate was 22 per 1000 (95% CI 20.7 to 23.6) compared with 4.4 per 1000 (95% CI 4.4 to 4.5) for the general population of Alberta. After accounting for comorbidity and severity of pneumonia, in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay were lower for First Nations Aboriginals compared with the matched non-First Nations group (odds ratio 0.49; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.66, and odds ratio 0.87; 95% CI 0.79 to 0.97, respectively). The odds for 30-day hospital readmission were higher in First Nations Aboriginals compared with the non-First Nations group (odds ratio 1.42; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.68). The cost per hospital admission for First Nations Aboriginals was 94% of the average cost for the matched non-First Nations group (CDN4,206 dollars). However, their median daily cost was 1.25 times higher (95% CI 1.14 to 1.36) than the matched non-First Nations group. CONCLUSIONS: First Nations Aboriginals had higher rates of hospitalization, rehospitalization and hospital costs for community-acquired pneumonia than non-First Nations Albertans. It was unlikely that the high rate of hospitalizations in First Nations Aboriginals was due to more severe pneumonia or greater comorbidity. Other unexplained factors increase the burden of this disease in First Nation Aboriginals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".