Age effect on the prediction of risk of prolonged length hospital stay in older patients visiting the emergency department: results from a large prospective geriatric cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the rapid growth of elderly patients visiting the Emergency Department (ED), it is expected that there will be even more hospitalisations following ED visits in the future. The aim of this study was to examine the age effect on the performance criteria of the 10-item brief geriatric assessment (BGA) for the prolonged length of hospital stay (LHS) using artificial neural networks (ANNs) analysis. METHODS: Based on an observational prospective cohort study, 1117 older patients (i.e., aged ≥ 65 years) ED users were admitted to acute care wards in a University Hospital (France) were recruited. The 10-items of BGA were recorded during the ED visit and prior to discharge to acute care wards. The top third of LHS (i.e., ≥ 13 days) defined the prolonged LHS. Analysis was successively performed on participants categorized in 4 age groups: aged ≥ 70, ≥ 75, ≥ 80 and ≥ 85 years. Performance criteria of 10-item BGA for the prolonged LHS were sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV], likelihood ratios [LR], area under receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]). The ANNs analysis method was conducted using the modified multilayer perceptron (MLP). RESULTS: Values of criteria performance were high (sensitivity> 89%, specificity≥ 96%, PPV > 87%, NPV > 96%, LR+ > 22; LR- ≤ 0.1 and AUROC> 93), regardless of the age group. CONCLUSIONS: Age effect on the performance criteria of the 10-item BGA for the prediction of prolonged LHS using MLP was minimal with a good balance between criteria, suggesting that this tool may be used as a screening as well as a predictive tool for prolonged LHS.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".