MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780861983 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000002036

Trends in Early Hospital Readmission After Kidney Transplantation, 2002 to 2014

2017· article· en· W2780861983 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kyla L. Naylor, Greg Knoll, Britney Allen, Alvin H. Li, Amit X. Garg, Ngan N. Lam, Megan K. McCallum, S. Joseph Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalWestern UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsMedicineTransplantationKidney transplantationIntensive care medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early hospital readmission (EHR) is associated with morbidity, mortality, and significant healthcare costs. However, trends over time in EHR events in kidney transplant recipients have not been examined. We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada, to determine whether the EHR incidence has changed from 2002 to 2014 in kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: We defined EHR as an unplanned admission for any reason to an acute care hospital within 30 days of being discharged from the hospital for transplantation; admissions for elective procedures were excluded. RESULTS: We included 5437 kidney transplant recipients. More recently transplanted recipients (2011 to 2014 vs 2002 to 2004) were older and more likely to have coronary artery disease. A total of 1128 (20.7%) kidney transplant recipients experienced an EHR. There was no trend in EHR across eras with a 30-day cumulative incidence of 23.0%, 21.4%, 18.4%, and 21.0% (P for trend =0.197) for the years 2002 to 2004, 2005 to 2007, 2008 to 2010, and 2011 to 2014, respectively. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, we found no association between era of transplant and EHR. When examining variation in EHR across the 6 adult transplant centers, we found the 30-day cumulative incidence varied significantly from 15.5% to 27.1% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: One in 5 kidney transplant recipients will experience an EHR; however, an increase in EHR over time has not been observed despite increasing recipient age and comorbidities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207