The Impact of a Transition of Care Program on Acute Myocardial Infarction Readmission Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hospital discharge is a high-risk time period, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients often have early readmissions. The authors hypothesized that a multifaceted AMI care coordination program would reduce early hospital readmission rates. The outcomes of patients receiving care coordination (n = 304) were compared to patients receiving standard care (n = 192). Multivariable analyses of the outcomes were conducted by conditional logistic regression of propensity score matched sets. The primary outcome-hospital readmission within 30 days of discharge-occurred in 18% of standard care patients and 11.8% of care coordination patients. Patients receiving care coordination demonstrated a 48% reduction in odds of readmission within 30 days (odds ratio = 0.52; P = .04; 95% CI = 0.28-0.97). These results are the first to demonstrate that inclusion in an AMI-specific care coordination program is associated with a significantly lower risk of 30-day hospital readmission.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".