MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320662637 · doi:10.1155/2016/1382434

Presentations to Emergency Departments for COPD: A Time Series Analysis

2016· article· en· W2320662637 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rhonda J. Rosychuk, Erik Youngson, Brian H. Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
FundersMerckGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMedicineAutoregressive integrated moving averageCOPDResidencePresentation (obstetrics)Emergency departmentPulmonary diseaseDemographyEmergency medicinePediatricsMedical emergencyGerontologyTime seriesInternal medicineSurgeryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common respiratory condition characterized by progressive dyspnea and acute exacerbations which may result in emergency department (ED) presentations. This study examines monthly rates of presentations to EDs in one Canadian province. Methods. Presentations for COPD made by individuals aged ≥55 years during April 1999 to March 2011 were extracted from provincial databases. Data included age, sex, and health zone of residence (North, Central, South, and urban). Crude rates were calculated. Seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (SARIMA) time series models were developed. Results. ED presentations for COPD totalled 188,824 and the monthly rate of presentation remained relatively stable (from 197.7 to 232.6 per 100,000). Males and seniors (≥65 years) comprised 52.2% and 73.7% of presentations, respectively. The ARIMA(1,0, 0) × (1,0, 1)12 model was appropriate for the overall rate of presentations and for each sex and seniors. Zone specific models showed relatively stable or decreasing rates; the North zone had an increasing trend. Conclusions. ED presentation rates for COPD have been relatively stable in Alberta during the past decade. However, their increases in northern regions deserve further exploration. The SARIMA models quantified the temporal patterns and can help planning future health care service needs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respiratory JournalSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207