MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148505743 · doi:10.3810/hp.2014.12.1159

Ability of Nurse Clinicians to Predict Unplanned Returns to Hospital Within Thirty Days of Discharge

2014· article· en· W2148505743 on OpenAlexaffabout
Romina Pace, Rachel Spevack, Claudia Menéndez, Maria Kouriambalis, Laurence Green, Dev Jayaraman

Bibliographic record

VenueHospital Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentUnivariateMultivariate analysisUnivariate analysisEmergency medicineMultivariate statisticsProspective cohort studyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of nurse clinician discharge flow coordinators (DFCs) to identify medical patients at risk of unplanned return to the hospital emergency department within 30 days of discharge and whether a higher predicted risk of return was correlated with preventability. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of patients discharged from medical wards at 2 hospital sites of the McGill University Health Center between September 1, 2011, and January 1, 2012. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors including the ability of DFCs to predict 30-day unplanned returns to the hospital. Assessment of the preventability of returns to the hospital was performed by chart review using prespecified criteria. The ability of DFCs to predict returns was compared to the LACE criteria (length of stay, acute admission through the emergency department, comorbidities, and emergency department visits in the past 6 months). RESULTS: We found that 25.0% (95% CI, 21.3-28.5) of our patients returned to the emergency department within 30 days. The DFC predictions were found to be significant in both univariate and multivariate analysis. Patient age, sex, and length of stay were not significant predictors in univariate or multivariate analysis; 13.9% (95% CI, 8.2-19.6) of returns were preventable and a further 25.8% (95% CI, 18.1-33.5) were potentially preventable with added services in the community. There was a trend toward more preventable or potentially preventable returns with higher predicted probability of return. In contrast the LACE criteria did not have a good predictive capacity in our patient population. CONCLUSION: In a large urban center, experienced nurse clinician DFCs were able to predict 30-day emergency department returns with reasonable accuracy. They were also able to identify the returns to the hospital that were most likely to be preventable. Our data suggests that DFCs can be used to target patients identified as having an increased probability of return with interventions that may be able to reduce the burden of return to hospital.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHospital PracticeSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207