Lack of patient involvement in care decisions and not receiving written discharge instructions are associated with unplanned readmissions up to one year
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This retrospective, cross-sectional study examined the relationship between aspects of inpatient communication and discharge instructions and unplanned, all-cause readmissions using individual-level data up to one-year post-discharge. Patients completed the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) telephone survey within 6 weeks of hospital discharge in Alberta, Canada. Survey data were linked to corresponding inpatient records. Independent variables included selected demographic characteristics, clinical variables, and five survey questions: a) patient involvement in care decisions, b) receiving written information at discharge, c) understanding the purpose of taking medications, d) understanding responsibility for one’s health, and e) discussing help needed when returning home. From April 2011 to March 2014, 24,869 patients with a mean age of 52.8±19.8 years (range=18-100) were included. 18.6% of patients (n=4,821) experienced an unplanned hospital readmission within 43 to 365 days post-discharge. In adjusted, logistic regression models, patients who felt they were not involved in care decisions were more likely to be readmitted (OR=1.34; 95%CI: 1.17-1.53), as were patients who reported not receiving written information about signs and symptoms to watch out for post-discharge (OR=1.24; 95%CI: 1.15-1.35). Odds of readmission did not differ according to understanding of medications, understanding responsibility for one’s health, or discussion of help needed when returning home. This study provides objective data, showing that specific hospital actions are associated with unplanned readmissions. It is an example of how patient-reported measures may be linked to administrative data to drive quality improvement initiatives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".