Impact of Stroke Care Unit on Patient Outcomes in a Community Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Geographically distinct multidisciplinary stroke care units (SCUs) have been shown by systematic reviews to have superior patient outcomes compared with conventional care in general medical wards. However, the effectiveness of SCUs in smaller North American community hospitals is less well defined. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of establishing a specialized SCU at a community hospital on patient outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 805 patients with stroke admitted to 2 community hospitals in Edmonton, Canada, from 2003 to 2009 using an administrative database. Stroke was identified by International Classification of Disease, 10th Edition, codes. One of the community hospitals established a SCU on January 1, 2007. This date was used to subdivide the patient population into 2 cohorts: phase 1 from 2003 to 2006 and phase 2 from 2007 to 2009. Outcomes measured were mortality, discharge disposition, length of stay, and complications and were adjusted for age, sex, and medical comorbidities. RESULTS: Patient mortality decreased significantly from 17.1% to 8.3% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.95) after SCU implementation, whereas it remained ≈19% at the control hospital. SCU also increased the odds that patients would be discharged home independently (adjusted OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.49-3.15; P<0.001] without increasing length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing a SCU in a community hospital not only increases the survival of stroke patients, but also the proportion of patients discharged home to live independently. The benefits of SCU reported in larger tertiary centers extend to smaller community hospitals with more limited resources.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".