Discharge against Medical Advice: A Case Study in a Public Teaching Hospital in Tehran, Iran in 2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discharging against medical advice is to leave the hospital despite the advice of the doctor, which can result in complications and readmissions. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of patients' discharge against medical advice (DAMA) and their reasons in a public teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran in 2012. This was an applied and cross-sectional study in which all patients (2601 patients) who had been discharged against medical advice from the studied hospital in 2012 were studied. Required data were collected using a data collection form. Collected data were analyzed using SPSS 18.0 and descriptive and analytical tests including Frequencies and Fisher's Exact Test. The most and least common reasons for DAMA were, respectively, feeling complete recovery by patients (45.4%) and financial problems (1.3%). The results showed that there were significant differences between DAMA prevalence and patients' sex and age (P<0.001). The prevalence of DAMA in the studied hospital was high and according to the existence of social work units in every hospital, it is recommended that patients' consultation with the hospital social workers should be considered as an obligatory stage of the discharge against medical advice process in order to inform patients about its complications and adverse consequences.
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 | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".