An estimate of post-acute intermediate care need in an elderly care department for older people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an expectation that intermediate care services for older people will be widely introduced in England. The planning of such services should be based on an understanding of required capacity. The present study provides a needs estimate for post-acute intermediate care. Older patients admitted acutely to an elderly care department in a district general hospital serving a large city in northern England were followed prospectively by a research team until medical stability had occurred in the opinion of the senior ward nurses and the responsible consultant. The clinical staff then determined if the patient had continuing post-acute care needs or if imminent discharge was possible. Out of 1211 acutely admitted patients, 997 became medically stable and 312 [25.8% of admissions; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 23.3-28.2%] were considered to require post-acute care, and of these, 251 (20.7% of admissions; 95% CI = 18.4-23.0%) needed post-acute rehabilitation care. In conclusion, the present authors suggest that intermediate care services providing post-acute care for older people should have a capacity to address the needs of up to one-quarter of acute admissions to a district general hospital elderly care department.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".