Reasons for Hospitalization Among Emergency Department Patients With Syncope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Variations in syncope management exist. Our objective was to identify the reasons for consultations and hospitalizations and outcomes among emergency department (ED) syncope patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study to enroll adult syncope patients at five EDs. We collected baseline characteristics, reasons for consultation and hospitalization, and hospital length of stay. Adjudicated 30-day serious adverse events (SAEs) including death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, structural heart disease, pulmonary embolism, significant hemorrhage, and procedural intervention. We used descriptive analysis. RESULTS: From 4,064 enrolled patients (mean ± SD age = 53.1 ± 23.2 years; 55.9% female), 3,255 (80.1%) were discharged directly by the ED physician. Of those with no SAEs identified in the ED (n = 600), 42.8% of referrals and 46.5% of hospitalizations were for suspected arrhythmias, and 71.2% of patients hospitalized for arrhythmias had no cause identified. SAEs among groups were 9.7% in total, 2.5% discharged by ED physician, 3.4% discharged by consultant, 21.7% as inpatient, and 4.8% following discharge from hospital. The median hospital length of stay for suspected arrhythmias was 5 days (interquartile range = 3 to 8 days). CONCLUSION: Cardiac syncope, particularly suspected arrhythmia, was the major reason for ED referrals and hospitalization. The majority of patients hospitalized for cardiac monitoring had no identified cause. An important number of patients suffered SAEs, particularly arrhythmias, outside the hospital. Development of a risk-stratification tool and out-of-hospital cardiac monitoring strategy should improve patient safety and save substantial resources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".