Factors Associated with Hospital Admission among Emergency Department Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: OBJECTIVES To determine the patient factors associated with hospital admission among adults who present to the emergency department (ED) with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to determine whether admissions were concordant with recommendations in the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines. METHODS: The authors performed a prospective multicenter cohort study involving 29 EDs in the United States and Canada. By using a standard protocol, consecutive ED patients with COPD exacerbation were interviewed, and their charts were reviewed. Predictors of admission were determined by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 384 patients, 233 (61%; 95% confidence interval = 56% to 66%) were admitted. Multivariate analysis showed that a higher likelihood of admission was associated with older age, female gender, more pack-years of smoking, recent use of inhaled corticosteroid, self-reported activity limitation in the past 24 hours, higher respiratory rate at ED presentation, and a concomitant diagnosis of pneumonia. Patients who reported the ED as their usual site for problem COPD care, or who had mixed COPD and asthma, were less likely to be admitted. The authors confirmed five of the seven testable indications for hospital admission in the GOLD guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient factors were independently associated with hospital admission among ED patients with COPD exacerbations. Overall, concordance with admission recommendations in the GOLD guidelines was high. The authors also identified a few novel predictors of admission (female gender, ED as the usual site for problem COPD care, mixed diagnosis of COPD and asthma, recent use of inhaled corticosteroid) that require replication in future studies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".