MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407521722

Increased mortality among the critically ill patients admitted on weekends: a global trend.

2011· article· en· W2407521722 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natalie Degenhardt

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHospital Admissions and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensivistStaffingCritically illMedicineNursingPopulationIntensive care medicineIntensive care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical illness and injury have no concept of time and do not always occur within regular business hours or at times conducive to optimal hospital function. In fact, it is a global trend that critically ill patients admitted to hospitals on weekends suffer higher mortality rates than those admitted during the week. Using a Canadian nursing lens, it is clear that there are some obvious differences in hospital function on weekends that include decreased hospital staffing, access to diagnostic services, intensivist coverage and the reluctance of patients to seek care on weekends. However, the exact differences contributing to the increased mortality in this patient population on weekends and the solutions remain unclear in the literature, and further research is needed. Possible solutions include moving to a "closed" ICU system, increasing nurse staffing, intensivist coverage and diagnostic accessibility, and creating a true seven-day hospital system. Finally, it is unclear exactly how to solve the nurse staffing portion of this problem, as it appears internally linked to the nursing profession and externally to hospital management, recruiting difficulties and financial restraints, and a problem that will take more than change in nursing management strategy to resolve.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHospital Admissions and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207