Hospital Contributions to Variability in the Use of ICUs Among Elderly Medicare Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hospitals vary widely in ICU admission rates across numerous medical diagnoses. The extent to which variability in ICU use is specific to individual diagnoses or is a function of the hospital, regardless of disease, is unknown. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 1,120 acute care hospitals with ICU capabilities. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries 65 years old or older admitted for five medical diagnoses (acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, stroke, pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and a surgical diagnosis (hip fracture treated with arthroplasty) in 2010. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used multilevel models to calculate risk- and reliability-adjusted ICU admission rates, examined the correlation in ICU admission rates across diagnosis and calculated intraclass correlation coefficients and median odds ratios to quantify the variability in ICU admission rate that was attributable to hospitals. We also examined the ability of a high ICU-use hospital for one condition to predict high ICU use for other conditions. We identified 348,462 patients with one of the eligible conditions. ICU admission rates were positively correlated within hospitals for included medical diagnoses (r range, 0.38-0.59; p < 0.01). The top hospital quartile of ICU use for congestive heart failure had a sensitivity of 50-60% and specificity of 79-81% for detecting top quartile hospitals for each other conditions. After adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, hospitals accounted for 17.6% (95% CI, 16.2-19.1%) of variability in ICU admission, corresponding to a median odds ratio of 2.3, compared to 25.8% (95% CI, 24.5-27.1%) and median odds ratio 2.8 for diagnosis. This suggests a patient with median baseline risk of ICU admission would more than double his/her odds of ICU admission if moving to a higher utilizing hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals account for a significant proportion of variation independent of measured patient and hospital characteristics, suggesting the need for further work to evaluate the causes of variation at the hospital level and potential consequences of variation across hospitals.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".