Probabilistic linkage in household survey on hospital care usage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential advantages and limitations of the use of the Brazilian hospital admission authorization forms database and the probabilistic record linkage methodology for the validation of reported utilization of hospital care services in household surveys. METHODS: A total of 2,288 households interviews were conducted in the county of Duque de Caxias, Brazil. Information on the occurrence of at least one hospital admission in the year preceding the interview was obtained from a total of 10,733 household members. The 130 records of household members who reported at least one hospital admission in a public hospital were linked to a hospital database with 801,587 records, using an automatic probabilistic approach combined with an extensive clerical review. RESULTS: Seventy-four (57%) of the 130 household members were identified in the hospital database. Yet only 60 subjects (46%) showed a record of hospitalization in the hospital database in the study period. Hospital admissions due to a surgery procedure were significantly more likely to have been identified in the hospital database. The low level of concordance seen in the study can be explained by the following factors: errors in the linkage process; a telescoping effect; and an incomplete record in the hospital database. CONCLUSIONS: The use of hospital administrative databases and probabilistic linkage methodology may represent a methodological alternative for the validation of reported utilization of health care services, but some strategies should be employed in order to minimize the problems related to the use of this methodology in non-ideal conditions. Ideally, a single identifier, such as a personal health insurance number, and the universal coverage of the database would be desirable.
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 | 0.057 | 0.167 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".