MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2173020608 · doi:10.11575/prism/26154

Factors That Influence 7- and 30-day Readmissions After Heart Failure Hospitalization

2015· dissertation· en· W2173020608 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Catherine Eastwood

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta InnovatesKillam TrustsAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsHeart failureMedicineEmergency medicineGerontologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients with heart failure (HF) frequently return to hospital within days of discharge, yet contributing factors have not been fully explored. Hospitalizations place stress on the patient, family, and healthcare system, and require closer examination to determine potential avoidability and targets for intervention. Thus, current factors that influence readmissions after HF hospitalization in Alberta were examined. A two-phased case-control design was used to compare patients who were readmitted and not readmitted after hospitalization for HF. In Phase One, an 8-year period of hospital discharge abstract data was analyzed. The rate of unplanned all-cause readmission was 6% and 18% within 7 and 30 days respectively after discharge. After risk adjustment for age, sex, and year, all-cause readmission within 7 days after discharge was associated with having kidney disease, and readmission within 30 days was associated with having cancer, pulmonary, liver, and kidney disease. At both time intervals, discharge with homecare services was associated with increased risk of readmission, and discharge from a hospital with HF services was associated with lower risk of readmission. In Phase Two, a health record audit was undertaken for a more detailed examination of factors associated with readmission within 7 days of discharge and potential avoidability. Matched pairs of patients discharged from Calgary hospitals were identified from the Phase One sample. Patients who were frail or had a specialist as attending physician were more likely to be readmitted. Patients who were instructed to see a physician within 1 week of discharge were less likely to be readmitted. Common reasons for readmission included HF then gastrointestinal, other cardiac, and respiratory diagnoses. Almost 60% of readmissions were deemed potentially avoidable based on explicit criteria developed from past research. Several factors were associated with readmission within the 2 time intervals studied. Despite care by specialists and referral to HF clinics, complex frail patients were discharged with unresolved symptoms or inadequate community support. It is important that criteria be developed to screen for frailty, discharge readiness, and to determine avoidability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicHeart Failure Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→