Impact of Living Alone on the Care and Outcomes of Patients With Acute Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Outcomes among patients living alone at stroke onset could be directly affected by reduced access to acute therapies or indirectly through the effects of social isolation. We examined the associations between living alone at home and acute stroke care and outcomes in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2008, 10 048 patients with acute stroke (87% ischemic, 13% hemorrhagic) who were living at home were admitted to 11 Ontario hospitals. Outcomes included arrival≤2.5 hours of onset, thrombolytic treatment, discharge home, 30-day and 1-year mortality, and 1-year readmission. The effects of living alone versus living with others were determined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 22.8% (n=2288) of patients were living alone at home before stroke. Subjects living alone were significantly older (mean, 74.6 versus 71.5 years), more likely to be women (61.5% versus 41.4%), widowed (53.7% versus 12.3%), or single (21.5% versus 3.8%). Patients living alone were less likely to arrive within 2.5 hours (28.3% versus 40.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.60), to receive thrombolysis (8.0% versus 14.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.63), or to be discharged home (46.0% versus 54.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.73). There were no significant associations between living alone and mortality or readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Patients living alone had delayed hospital arrival, less thrombolytic therapy, and were less likely to return home. Greater understanding of the inter-relationships among living alone, social isolation, access to stroke care, and outcomes is needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".