MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063256801 · doi:10.1353/cja.2005.0044

Use of Acute Care Hospitals by Long-Stay Patients: Who, How Much, and Why?

2005· article· en· W2063256801 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carolyn De Coster, Sharon Bruce, Anita Kozyrskyi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute careEmergency medicineAcute hospitalHospital dischargeLong-term carePatient dischargeMedical recordHealth careMEDLINEIntensive care medicineNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of long-term hospitalizations can be severe, especially among older adults. In Manitoba, between fiscal years 1991/1992 and 1999/2000, 40 per cent of acute care hospital days were used by the 5 per cent of patients who had long stays, defined as stays of more than 30 days. These proportions were remarkably stable, despite major changes in the bed supply. Approximately two-thirds of long-stay patients were aged 75 or older. Medical record review for a small sample of long-stay medical patients aged 75 or older revealed that 42 per cent of the days spent in hospital were spent either awaiting transfer to another level of care (home care, nursing home, or chronic care), or were due to in-hospital factors, such as awaiting consults, tests, or treatments. Hospital information systems and early discharge planning may help to alleviate lengthy discharge delays and result in better care for these patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207