Transition of care for hospitalized elderly patients—Development of a discharge checklist for hospitalists
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Discharge from the hospital is a critical transition point in a patient's care. Incomplete handoffs at discharge can lead to adverse events for patients and result in avoidable rehospitalization. Care transitions are especially important for elderly patients and other high-risk patients who have multiple comorbidities. Standardizing the elements of the discharge process may help to address the gaps in quality and safety that occur when patients transition from the hospital to an outpatient setting. METHODS: The Society of Hospital Medicine's Hospital Quality and Patient Safety committee assembled a panel of care transition researchers, process improvement experts, and hospitalists to review the literature and develop a checklist of processes and elements required for ideal discharge of adult patients. The discharge checklist was presented at the Society of Hospital Medicine's Annual Meeting in April 2005, where it was reviewed and revised by more than 120 practicing hospitalists and hospital-based nurses, case managers, and pharmacists. The final checklist was endorsed by the Society of Hospital Medicine. RESULTS: The finalized checklist is a comprehensive list of the processes and elements considered necessary for optimal patient handoff at hospital discharge. This checklist focused on medication safety, patient education, and follow-up plans. CONCLUSIONS: The development of content and process standards for discharge is the first step in improving the handoff of care from the inpatient to the posthospital setting. Refining this checklist for patients with specific diagnoses, in specific age categories, and with specific discharge destinations may further improve information transfer and ultimately affect patient outcomes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it