MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891009223 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v5i1.1343

Can Linked Electronic Medical Record and Administrative Data Help Us Identify Those Living with Frailty?

2020· article· en· W2891009223 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sabrina T. Wong, Alan Katz, Tyler Williamson, Alexander Singer, Sandra Peterson, Carole Taylor, Morgan Price, Rita McCracken, Manpreet Thandi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsMedicineMedical recordPopulationElectronic medical recordHealth careHealth dataGerontologyDemographyMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is a complex condition that affects many aspects of patients' wellbeing and health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: We used available Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and administrative data to determine definitions of frailty. We also examined whether there were differences in demographics or health conditions among those identified as frail in either the EMR or administrative data. METHODS: EMR and administrative data were linked in British Columbia (BC) and Manitoba (MB) to identify those aged 65 years and older who were frail. The EMR data were obtained from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) and the administrative data (e.g. billing, hospitalizations) was obtained from Population Data BC and the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository. Sociodemographic characteristics, risk factors, prescribed medications, use and costs of healthcare are described for those identified as frail. RESULTS: Sociodemographic and utilization differences were found among those identified as frail from the EMR compared to those in the administrative data. Among those who were >65 years, who had a record in both EMR and administrative data, 5%-8% (n=191 of 3,553, BC; n=2,396 of 29,382, MB) were identified as frail. There was a higher likelihood of being frail with increasing age and being a woman. In BC and MB, those identified as frail in both data sources have approximately twice the number of contacts with primary care (n=20 vs. n=10) and more days in hospital (n=7.2 vs. n=1.9 in BC; n=9.8 vs. n=2.8 in MB) compared to those who are not frail; 27% (BC) and 14% (MB) of those identified as frail in 2014 died in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying frailty using EMR data is particularly challenging because many functional deficits are not routinely recorded in structured data fields. Our results suggest frailty can be captured along a continuum using both EMR and administrative data.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207