Forecasting Hospitalization and Emergency Department Visit Rates for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Time-Series Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Knowing trends in and forecasting hospitalization and emergency department visit rates for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can enable health care providers, hospitals, and health care decision makers to plan for the future. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a time-series analysis using health care administrative data from the Province of Ontario, Canada, to determine previous trends in acute care hospitalization and emergency department visit rates for COPD and then to forecast future rates. METHODS: Individuals aged 35 years and older with physician-diagnosed COPD were identified using four universal government health administrative databases and a validated case definition. Monthly COPD hospitalization and emergency department visit rates per 1,000 people with COPD were determined from 2003 to 2014 and then forecasted to 2024 using autoregressive integrated moving average models. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2014, COPD prevalence increased from 8.9 to 11.1%. During that time, there were 274,951 hospitalizations and 290,482 emergency department visits for COPD. After accounting for seasonality, we found that monthly COPD hospitalization and emergency department visit rates per 1,000 individuals with COPD remained stable. COPD prevalence was forecasted to increase to 12.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.4-14.1) by 2024, whereas monthly COPD hospitalization and emergency department visit rates per 1,000 people with COPD were forecasted to remain stable at 2.7 (95% CI, 1.6-4.4) and 3.7 (95% CI, 2.3-5.6), respectively. Forecasted age- and sex-stratified rates were also stable. CONCLUSIONS: COPD hospital and emergency department visit rates per 1,000 people with COPD have been stable for more than a decade and are projected to remain stable in the near future. Given increasing COPD prevalence, this means notably more COPD health service use in the future.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".