Home care utilization and outcomes among Asian and other Canadian patients with heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of hospitalization and death in the aging population around the world. Home care utilization is associated with improved survival for the patients with HF, and varies by ethno-culture. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in hospital readmission rate and mortality between Asian and other Canadian HF patients. METHODS: HF patients were identified using hospital discharge abstracts from March 31, 2000 to April 1, 2006 in Calgary Health Region. Readmission and one-year mortality for HF were determined by linking hospital discharge and vital statistics data. Stratified by home care services use, readmission and mortality rates were compared between the Asians and other Canadians while controlling for age, sex, comorbidities, and household income. RESULTS: Of 26,171 HF patients discharged from hospital, 56.6% of Asians and 58.0% of other Canadians used home care services [adjusted odds ratio (OR) for Asian: 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.89]. The hospital readmission rate was similar between Asians and other Canadians regardless of home care services use. Mortality was similar between those who used home care services (adjusted OR for Asian: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.81-1.13). For patients who did not use home care services, Asians had significantly lower mortality than other Canadians (adjusted OR for Asian: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60-0.86). CONCLUSION: Mortality was similar between Asian and other Canadian patients when home care services were utilized. However, among those without home care, Asian patients had a significantly lower mortality than other Canadian 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".