MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Return to the Emergency Department among Elders: Patterns And Predictors

2000· article· en· W1977125335 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Notre-DameMcGill UniversityHEC MontréalSt Mary's Hospital Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentLogistic regressionMedical diagnosisEmergency medicineDemographyGerontologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: 1) To describe the pattern of return visits to the emergency department (ED) among elders over the six months following an index visit; 2) to identify the predictors of early return (within 30 days) and frequent return (three or more return visits in six months); and 3) to evaluate a newly developed screening tool for functional decline, Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR), with regard to its ability to predict return visits. METHODS: Subjects were patients aged 65 years or more who visited the EDs of four Canadian hospitals during the weekday shift over a three-month recruitment period. Excluded were patients who: could not be interviewed, due either to their medical conditions or to cognitive impairment, and no other informant was available; refused linkage of study data; or were admitted to hospital at the initial (index) visit. Measures made at the index ED visit included: 27 self-report screening questions on social, physical, and mental risk factors, medical history, use of hospital services, medications, and alcohol. Six of these questions comprised the ISAR scale. Return visits and diagnoses during the six months after the index visit were abstracted from the utilization database. RESULTS: Among 1,122 patients released from the ED, 492 (43.9%) made one or more return visits; 216 (19.3%) returned early and 84 (7.5%) returned frequently. Earlier returns were more likely than later returns to be for the same diagnosis (p = 0.003). Using logistic regression, hospitalization during the previous six months, feeling depressed, and certain diagnoses predicted both early and frequent returns. Also, a history of heart disease, having ever been married, and not drinking alcohol daily predicted early return; a history of diabetes, a recent ED visit, and lack of support predicted frequent use. CONCLUSIONS: In the first month after an ED visit, return rates are highest and are more likely to be for the same diagnosis. Both medical and social factors predict early and frequent returns to the ED; patients at increased risk of return can be quickly identified with a short, self-report questionnaire. The ISAR screening tool, developed to identify patients at increased risk of functional decline, can also identify patients who are more likely to return to the ED.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it