Short-term mortality associated with failure to receive home care after hemiarthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hemiarthroplasty is often the treatment of choice after hip fracture, particularly in frail elderly patients. Such patients may benefit from home care after discharge. We assessed factors associated with the receipt of home care and evaluated the risk of death within three months after discharge. METHODS: We obtained administrative data for patients 65 years or older in the province of Quebec who were discharged alive from hospital after hemiarthroplasty during the period 1997-2004. We evaluated destination after discharge and mortality within three months after discharge. RESULTS: Of 11 326 study patients, 5.6% were discharged home with home care, 29.9% home without home care, 2.0% to a rehabilitation centre, 24.2% to a nursing home and 38.3% to another hospital. Among patients who were discharged home, those who were older, had osteoarthritis, had an emergent admission and were admitted to a high-volume hospital were less likely to receive home care. Discharge with home care was most likely among patients admitted to teaching hospitals, those in hospital for more than seven days, those with atrial fibrillation and those with acute renal failure. Patients who received home care were at lower risk of death than those discharged home without care (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.39-0.85). INTERPRETATION: Less than 16% of the patients discharged home after hemiarthroplasty received home care. Those who received such care had a lower risk of death within three months after discharge.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".