Profiling Acute Presenting Symptoms of Geriatric Patients Attending an Urban Hospital Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the profile of geriatric patients warded to the emergency department (ED) of an Asian acute care general hospital and determine if they are 'more ill', more likely to have atypical presentations and have a higher utilisation of healthcare resources when compared to a younger group of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients aged 45 years and above presenting to the study ED over a period of 4 weeks from 4 June 2006 to 1 July 2006. The following data were obtained: (i) demographics, (ii) mode of arrival and triage acuity, (iii) presence of co-morbidities, (iv) investigations ordered in the ED, (v) clinical symptoms and diagnoses, (vi) disposition, (vii) length of hospital stay, (viii) injuries and outcomes of elderly fallers. The study population was divided into 2 groups--a study group with patients aged 65 years and above, and a control group with patients aged 45 to 64. RESULTS: There were 2847 patients in the study group and these were compared against 2875 in the control group. Those 65 years and above had greater representation in the ED population compared to the general population. In the study group, the proportion of females, the number arriving by ambulance and the likelihood of having a higher triage acuity increased with age. The elderly had higher rates of co-morbidities. They also had a higher resource utilisation rate. Falls was their commonest presenting complaint. CONCLUSION: It is crucial that EDs recognise the special needs of elderly patients due to the growing ageing population. Healthcare policy makers when allocating resources should take into account the profile of elderly patients presenting to an ED and their resource utilisation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".