The Effect of Age upon Care and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for Congestive Heart Failure in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the age-specific outcomes for patients hospitalized with newly diagnosed congestive heart failure using administrative hospital abstracts from Alberta, Canada, from April 1, 1994, to March 31, 2000. Seniors (aged 65 years and older) constituted about 85 per cent of the 16,162 patients. Both co-morbidity and severity of illness tended to increase with age. The use of special care unit admissions, coronary artery diagnostic services (cardiac catheterization), and revascularization procedures (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty/stenting, coronary artery bypass surgery) peaked in the 50-to 64-year age group and decreased with increasing age. Specialist/sub-specialist care, prescriptions of beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors / angiotensin receptor blockers decreased with age in seniors. Adjusted in-hospital, 1-year mortality and crude, age-specific 5-year mortality were significantly greater in those 75 years and older. Outcomes and process of care in patients with newly diagnosed congestive heart failure were not uniformly distributed with age. The elderly had greater mortality but received less therapy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".