Mortality of Elderly Patients in Ontario after Hospital Admission for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with significant mortality. It is currently the fourth leading cause of death in Canada and the world. OBJECTIVES: To describe the mortality of elderly patients in Ontario after hospital admission for COPD. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Discharge Abstract Database from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Patients aged 65 years and older who were admitted to hospital between 2001 and 2004 with primary discharge diagnoses labelled with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes 491, 492 and 496 were included in the study. RESULTS: Mortality rates were 8.81, 12.10, 14.53 and 27.72 per 100 COPD hospital admissions at 30, 60, 90 and 365 days after hospital discharge, respectively. Mortality also increased with age, and men had higher rates than women. No significant differences in mortality rates were found between different socioeconomic groups (P>0.05). Patients with shared care of a family physician or general practitioner and a specialist had significantly lower mortality rates than the overall rate (P<0.05), and their rates were approximately one-half the rate of patients with only one physician. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization with COPD is associated with significant mortality. Patients who were cared for by both a family physician or general practitioner and a specialist had significantly lower mortality rates than those cared for by only one physician, suggesting that continuous and coordinated care results in better survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".