Characteristics of Older Adults Admitted to Hospital versus Those Discharged Home, in Emergency Department Patients Referred to Internal Medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frail older adults present to the Emergency Department (ED) with complex medical, functional, and social needs. When these needs can be addressed promptly, discharge is possible, and when they cannot, hospital admission is required. We evaluated the care needs of frail older adults in the ED who were consulted to internal medicine and seen by a geriatrician to determine, under current practices, which factors were associated with hospitalization and which allowed discharge. METHODS: We preformed a chart-based, exploratory study. Data were abstracted from consultation records and ED charts. All cases had a standard Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA which records a Clinical Frailty Scale (CFA) and allows calculation of a Frailty Index (FI). RESULTS: Of 100 consecutive patients, 2 died in the ED, 75 were admitted, and 23 were discharged, including one urgent placement. Compared with discharged patients (0.39 ± SD 0.16), those admitted had a higher mean FI-CGA (0.48 ± 0.13; p < .01). Greater mobility dependence (2% in discharged vs. 32% in admitted; p < .05) was notable. CONCLUSIONS: Discharge decisions require assessment of medical, functional, and social problems. Ill, frail patients often can be discharged home when social and nursing support can be provided. The degree of frailty, impaired mobility, and likely delirium must be taken into account when planning for their care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".