Does Increased Medication Use among Seniors Increase Risk of Hospitalization and Emergency Department Visits?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent of the health risks of consuming multiple medications among the older population. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Secondary data from the period 2004-2006. The study setting was the province of Ontario, Canada, and the sample consisted of individuals aged 65 years or older who responded to a national health survey. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated a system of equations for inpatient and emergency department (ED) services to test the marginal effect of medication use on hospital services. We controlled for endogeneity in medication use with a two-stage residual inclusion approach appropriate for nonlinear models. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Increased prescription drug use has the effect of increasing the likelihood of both being admitted into hospital and visiting a hospital ED. Each additional medication is associated with a 2-3 percent increase in the likelihood of hospitalization and a 3-4 percent increase in the likelihood of an ED visit, after controlling for past utilization, health status, the endogeneity of medication use, and the unobserved factors that may affect the use of both services. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple medications appear to increase the risk of hospitalization among seniors covered by a universal prescription drug plan. These results raise questions about the appropriateness of medication use and the need for increased oversight of current prescribing practices.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".