Impact of gastroenterologist care on health outcomes of hospitalised ulcerative colitis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of in-hospital gastroenterologist care, relative to other provider care, on health outcomes of hospitalised Ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. DESIGN: A population-based cohort study of 4278 UC patients hospitalised between 2002 and 2008 was conducted in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality risk. RESULTS: UC patients admitted under non-gastroenterologists had a higher in-hospital mortality rate (1.1 vs 0.2%, p<0.0001) but a similar in-hospital colectomy rate (5.4 vs 4.9%, p=0.69) as compared to UC patients admitted under gastroenterologists. Following covariate adjustment, non-gastroenterologist care was associated with a greater in-hospital mortality risk relative to gastroenterologist care (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.28, 95% CI 1.03 to 10.5). This increased mortality risk was observed in patients admitted to other internists (OR 5.49, 95% CI 1.75 to 17.2) and general practitioners (OR 6.02, 95% CI 1.84 to 19.7), with a trend towards greater mortality risk among patients admitted to general surgeons (OR 3.49, 95% CI 0.90 to 13.6). Among patients who were discharged from hospital colectomy-free, those who were admitted under non-gastroenterologists had a greater one-year risk of death than patients who were admitted under gastroenterologists (adjusted HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.40). The type of hospital provider did not impact in-hospital or one-year colectomy risks or the risk of hospital re-admission in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Primary in-hospital gastroenterologist care was associated with decreased in-hospital and one-year mortality risks among hospitalised UC patients. Optimised care strategies by experienced specialists may confer important health advantages in this patient population.
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) | 0.000 | 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".