MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336992604

OUTCOMES FOLLOWING HIP FRACTURES TREATED IN TEACHING VERSUS COMMUNITY HOSPITALS

2008· article· en· W2336992604 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Iris Weller, Hans J. Kreder, Eugene K. Wai, Susan Jaglal, J. Schatzker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionHip fractureMortality rateEmergency medicineDatabaseSurgeryOsteoporosisInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compared the mortality of hip fracture patients treated in teaching versus community hospitals in Ontario. Hip fracture patients ≥ 50 yrs were identified from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Hospital Discharge Abstracts Database and linked to the Registered Persons Database for death information. Logistic regression analyses were done to assess the relation between hospital type and both mortality and complications after surgery. Covariates examined include sex, age, Charlson-Deyo index, time to surgery and their interactions. Although patients treated in teaching hospitals have more comorbidities and complications they have lower mortality than those treated in community hospitals. To compare the mortality of hip fracture patients treated in teaching versus urban and rural community hospitals in Ontario. Although patients treated in teaching hospitals have more comorbidities and complications they have lower mortality than those treated in community hospitals. This finding will have far-reaching implications for health policy in this province. Hip fracture (ICD-9 code 820) patients ≥ 50 yrs treated in Ontario between 1993 and 1999 were identified from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Hospital Discharge Abstracts Database. These were linked to the Registered Persons Database for death information. Logistic regression analyses were done to assess the relation between hospital type and both mortality and complications after surgery. Covariates examined include sex, age, Charlson-Deyo index, time to surgery and their interactions. Patients treated in teaching hospitals and rural community hospitals were more likely to have a major complication than those in urban community hospitals, adjusted OR (95% CI) 1.37 (1.29–1.45); 1.28 (1.06–1.55) respectively. Patients in teaching hospitals had more comordities than those in community urban or rural hospitals. Nevertheless, patients treated in teaching hospitals have lower mortality (in hospital, and at three, six and twelve months post-surgery) than those in urban community hospitals, adjusted OR (95% CI) 0.76 (0.60–0.96), 0.90 (0.85–0.96), 0.91 (0.86–0.96), 0.92 (0.88–0.96) respectively. The difference between rural and urban community hospitals was not statistically significant, however there was a trend to higher mortality in rural institutions, adjusted OR (95% CI) 0.79 (0.63–1.00), 1.13 (0.95–1.36), 1.16 (0.98–1.36), 1.13 (0.97–1.32) respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207