MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797552243 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/iry006.217

295 Burn Patients that Exceed the Average Length of Stay

2018· article· en· W2797552243 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Rehou, R. Dölp, Matthew R. McCann, Marc G. Jeschke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBurn centerEtiologyRetrospective cohort studySepsisDepression (economics)Total body surface areaCohortEmergency medicinePoison controlInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Burn patients show a high variability and poor predictability in their length-of-stay (LOS) due to the complexity of burn injury itself and various complications. To focus care expectation and prognosis we aimed to identify key factors that contribute to prolonged LOS. A retrospective cohort-study was conducted in an adult burn-center between January 2006 and December 2016. We excluded patients that died during hospitalization and patients with <10% TBSA burn. Patients were then stratified into expected-LOS (<2days LOS/%TBSA) and longer-than-expected-LOS (>2days LOS/%TBSA). We assessed demographics, burn etiology, comorbidities, and in-hospital complications. Logistic regression and propensity matching (adjustment/matching for age, gender, inhalation injury, and TBSA% of 3rd degree burns) was utilized. There were 583 patients that met inclusion criteria; and of those, 477 showed an expected-LOS whereas 106 exceeded that time frame. Patients who exceeded their LOS were significantly older, had greater 3rd degree TBSA% burn, and a larger proportion of inhalation injuries (p<0.05). Additionally, there was a significantly greater proportion of these patients that had in-hospital complications of infection, sepsis, and organ failure (p<0.05). Interesting, exceeding LOS patients also had a higher number of pre-existing psychiatric conditions such as depression or schizophrenia. In-hospital complications have a high influence on exceeding the average LOS in burn patients. Burn patients also have a unique and complex set of pre-existing medical conditions such as mental health issues that further complicate their treatment and interferes with an early recovery and discharge. More studies are need to investigate how to modify these critical factors. Progress has been made to update the 1day/%TBSA convention to better aid health care providers in giving appropriate outcomes for patients and their families and to supply intensive care units with valuable data to assess the quality of their care and improve patient prognosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207