MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549444973 · doi:10.14740/jocmr2783w

Predictors of Transition to Hospice Care Among Hospitalized Older Adults With a Diagnosis of Dementia in Texas: A Population-Based Study

2016· article· en· W2549444973 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lavi Oud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaMedicaidOdds ratioConfidence intervalLogistic regressionIntensive care unitOddsTransitional careEnd-of-life careEmergency medicineMechanical ventilationPopulationMultivariate analysisGerontologyPalliative careHealth careIntensive care medicineInternal medicineDiseaseNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decedent older adults with dementia are increasingly less likely to die in a hospital, though escalation of care to a hospital setting, often including critical care, remains common. Although hospice is increasingly reported as the site of death in these patients, the factors associated with transition to hospice care during end-of-life (EOL) hospitalizations of older adults with dementia and the extent of preceding escalation of care to an intensive care unit (ICU) setting among those discharged to hospice have not been examined. METHODS: We identified hospitalizations aged ≥ 65 years with a diagnosis of dementia in Texas between 2001 and 2010. Potential factors associated with discharge to hospice were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression modeling, and occurrence of hospice discharge preceded by ICU admission was examined. RESULTS: There were 889,008 elderly hospitalizations with a diagnosis of dementia during study period, with 40,669 (4.6%) discharged to hospice. Discharges to hospice increased from 908 (1.5%) to 7,398 (6.3%) between 2001 and 2010 and involved prior admission to ICU in 45.2% by 2010. Non-dementia comorbidities were generally associated with increased odds of hospice discharge, as were development of organ failure, the number of failing organs, or use of mechanical ventilation. However, discharge to hospice was less likely among non-white minorities (lowest among blacks: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65 - 0.70) and those with non-commercial primary insurance or the uninsured (lowest among those with Medicaid: aOR (95% CI): 0.41 (0.37 - 0.46)). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified potentially modifiable factors associated with disparities in transition to hospice care during EOL hospitalizations of older adults with dementia, which persisted across comorbidity and severity of illness measures. The prevalent discharge to hospice involving prior critical care suggests that key discussions about goals-of-care likely took place following further escalation of care to ICU. Together these findings can inform system- and clinician-level interventions to facilitate timely and consistent use of hospice to meet patients' goals of 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 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207