MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036364169 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024459

Readmission Rates of Patients Discharged against Medical Advice: A Matched Cohort Study

2011· article· en· W2036364169 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

VenuePLoS ONE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohort studyCohortMEDLINEEmergency medicineFamily medicineInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We compared the readmission rates and the pattern of readmission among patients discharged against medical advice (AMA) to control patients discharged with approval over a one-year follow-up period. METHODS: A retrospective matched-cohort study of 656 patients(328 were discharged AMA) who were followed for one year after their initial hospitalization at an urban university-affiliated teaching hospital in Vancouver, Canada that serves a population with high prevalence of addiction and psychiatric disorders. Multivariate conditional logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of discharge AMA on 14-day related diagnosis hospital readmission. We fit a multivariate conditional negative binomial regression model to examine the readmission frequency ratio between the AMA and non-AMA group. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: AMA patients were more likely to be homeless (32.3% vs. 11%) and have co-morbid conditions such as psychiatric illnesses, injection drug use, HIV, hepatitis C and previous gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients discharged AMA were more likely to be readmitted: 25.6% vs. 3.4%, p<0.001 by day 14. The AMA group were more likely to be readmitted within 14 days with a related diagnosis than the non-AMA group (Adjusted Odds Ratio 12.0; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.7-38.9). Patients who left AMA were more likely to be readmitted multiple times at one year compared to the non-AMA group (adjusted frequency ratio 1.6; 95% CI: 1.3-2.0). There was also higher all-cause in-hospital mortality during the 12-month follow-up in the AMA group compared to non-AMA group (6.7% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged AMA were more likely to be homeless and have multiple co-morbid conditions. At one year follow-up, the AMA group had higher readmission rates, were predisposed to multiple readmissions and had a higher in-hospital mortality. Interventions to reduce discharges AMA in high-risk groups need to be developed and tested.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.262 · 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