MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332393210 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e318236f49b

The epidemiology of Hajj-related critical illness

2011· article· en· W2332393210 on OpenAlexaff
Yasser Mandourah, Ali Ocheltree, Assim Al Radi, Robert Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTravel-related health issues
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHajjEpidemiologyCritical illnessIntensive care medicineHeat illnessCritically illInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONAL: The annual Hajj experience has direct relevance for other jurisdictions planning rapid deployment strategies for intensive care for large groups during expected or emergent events. OBJECTIVE: Approximately 2-3 million Muslims from over 160 countries travel to Saudi Arabia each year for Hajj. These pilgrims are typically older adults with a spectrum of comorbid conditions and of various ethnicities. This, coupled with a 2-wk period of physical migration in close contact with others, can lead to acute and critical illness from a variety of infectious and noninfectious causes and a requirement for full-scale but temporary intensive care to a large population. We describe patient characteristics, patterns of disease, and critical illness, including episodes of Influenza A 2009 (H1N1), therapies delivered, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 110 critically ill patients in four hospitals during the 2009 ("1431": November 18 to December 4) Hajj in Saudi Arabia. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) age was 60.5 (51.3-70) yrs, 69 (62.7%) were male, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV score was 60.5 (47-78.3). Forty-one patients (37.3%) were critically ill due to cardiovascular diseases (23.6% with myocardial infarction); 51 (46.4%) had severe infections (21.8% with H1N1); electrolyte disturbance (21.8%); or pulmonary illness (15.5%). Sixty patients (54.6%) required ventilation. Median predicted mortality by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV was 14% while actual short-term mortality was 6.4% (p = .009). Longer-term mortality may be higher. CONCLUSION: Both event-specific conditions and patient-specific comorbid conditions are common causes of critical illness during large gatherings. With the ability to provide temporary but full-service intensive care, morbidity and mortality due to critical illness can be low, even among an older patient population and difficult care conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicTravel-related health issuesFrench-language works237,207