Age Disparities in Stroke Quality of Care and Delivery of Health Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited information is available on the effect of age on stroke management and care delivery. Our aim was to determine whether access to stroke care, delivery of health services, and clinical outcomes after stroke are affected by age. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients with acute ischemic stroke in the province of Ontario, Canada, admitted to stroke centers participating in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network between July 1, 2003 and March 31, 2005. Primary outcomes were the following selected indicators of quality stroke care: (1) use of thrombolysis; (2) dysphagia screening; (3) admission to a stroke unit; (4) carotid imaging; (5) antithrombotic therapy; and (6) warfarin for atrial fibrillation at discharge. Secondary outcomes were risk-adjusted stroke fatality, discharge disposition, pneumonia, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Among 3631 patients with ischemic stroke, 1219 (33.6%) were older than 80 years. There were no significant differences in stroke care delivery by age group. Stroke fatality increased with age, with a 30-day risk adjusted fatality of 7.1%, 6.5%, 8.8%, and 14.8% for those aged 59 or younger, 60 to 69, 70 to 79, and 80 years or older, respectively. Those aged older than 80 years had a longer length of hospitalization, increased risk of pneumonia, and higher disability at discharge compared to those younger than 80. This group was also less likely to be discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of a province-wide coordinated stroke care system, stroke care delivery was similar across all age groups with the exception of slightly lower rates of investigations in the very elderly. Increasing age was associated with stroke severity and stroke case-fatality.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".