Organized Outpatient Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Organized inpatient stroke care decreases mortality and morbidity irrespective of patient age, stroke severity, or stroke subtype. Limited information is available on whether organized outpatient care models such as stroke prevention clinics (SPC) improve outcomes after a transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. We compared 1-year mortality and stroke readmission in patients with transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke referred versus not referred to an SPC. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including 16,468 consecutive patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack who were seen in the emergency department or admitted to a hospital between July 1, 2003 and March 31, 2008 at registry stroke centers (n=12) in the province of Ontario. Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score-matched analyses were used to evaluate 1-year mortality and readmission. RESULTS: One-year mortality rates were lower in those referred to SPCs compared with those not referred, even after adjustment for age, sex, ethnic origin, income, comorbid conditions, stroke symptoms and severity, receipt of thrombolysis, stroke unit care, discharge destination, and functional status at discharge (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.60-0.75). Survival analysis after propensity matching showed a 26% reduction in 1-year mortality (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.84). There were no significant differences in 1-year readmission rates in those referred versus not referred to SPCs. CONCLUSIONS: Referral to an SPC is associated with a one-quarter reduction in mortality after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. This supports the argument that outpatient stroke units may prove as effective as their inpatient counterparts.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".