Emergency department utilization by haemophilia patients in United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patients with haemophilia are prone to medical emergencies. Emergency departments (ED) often do not have a haematologist on-call for consultation. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the utilization of ED by patients with haemophilia. METHODS: Retrospective review of the 'National ED Database Sample' for years 2006-2013 was performed. Patient and hospital demographics were collected. Hospital charges were projected to national levels using discharge-weighted variables. RESULTS: During the 8-year study period, haemophilia patients made 162 982 ED visits. This represents 0.016% of total ED visits nationwide. Children utilized ED the most. More than half of patients resided in metropolitan cities; 20% had over $63 000 annual household income. Government insurances were the largest primary payers; 30% had private insurance. In the year 2012, 4488 ED visits with 21 000 diagnoses codes were recorded. Mean age was 29 years. Cardiovascular were the most frequently reported complaints followed by injuries, haemorrhages and sepsis. Seventy percent patients were treated and released from the ED. Two patients died in ED, whereas 35 after admission to hospital. Cause of death included Sepsis (n = 26) and brain haemorrhage (n = 4). Among children, injuries were the most frequent complaints followed by joint/soft tissue disorders; fevers and central line complications. Average charge per visit at private vs. public hospital was $2988 and $2254 respectively (P = 0.03). National estimate of total charges was $60 million. CONCLUSION: Patients with haemophilia have tendency to utilize ED. Hypertension was the single most common presenting complaint in adults. No deaths were reported in children from brain haemorrhage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".