Influenza and Seasonal Patterns of Hospital Use by Older Adults in Long-Term Care and Community Settings in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We compared seasonal influenza hospital use among older adults in long-term care (LTC) and community settings. METHODS: We used provincial administrative data from Ontario to identify all emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions for pneumonia and influenza among adults older than 65 years between 2002 and 2008. We used sentinel laboratory reports to define influenza and summer seasons and estimated mean annual event rates and influenza-associated rates. RESULTS: Mean annual pneumonia and influenza ED visit rates were higher in LTC than the community (rate ratio [RR] for influenza season = 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.8, 4.0; for summer = 4.9; 95% CI = 4.8, 5.1) but this was attenuated in influenza-associated rates (RR = 2.4; 95% CI = 2.1, 2.8). The proportion of pneumonia and influenza ED visits attributable to seasonal influenza was 17% (15%-20%) in LTC and 28% (27%-29%) in the community. Results for hospital admissions were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: We found high rates of hospital use from LTC but evidence of lower impact of circulating influenza in the community. This differential impact of circulating influenza between the 2 environments may result from different influenza control policies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".