Paediatric postdischarge mortality in developing countries: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To update the current evidence base on paediatric postdischarge mortality (PDM) in developing countries. Secondary objectives included an evaluation of risk factors, timing and location of PDM. DESIGN: Systematic literature review without meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Searches of Medline and EMBASE were conducted from October 2012 to July 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were conducted in developing countries and examined paediatric PDM. 1238 articles were screened, yielding 11 eligible studies. These were added to 13 studies identified in a previous systematic review including studies prior to October 2012. In total, 24 studies were included for analysis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted and synthesised data using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Studies were conducted mostly within African countries (19 of 24) and looked at all admissions or specific subsets of admissions. The primary subpopulations included malnutrition, respiratory infections, diarrhoeal diseases, malaria and anaemia. The anaemia and malaria subpopulations had the lowest PDM rates (typically 1%-2%), while those with malnutrition and respiratory infections had the highest (typically 3%-20%). Although there was significant heterogeneity between study populations and follow-up periods, studies consistently found rates of PDM to be similar, or to exceed, in-hospital mortality. Furthermore, over two-thirds of deaths after discharge occurred at home. Highly significant risk factors for PDM across all infectious admissions included HIV status, young age, pneumonia, malnutrition, anthropometric variables, hypoxia, anaemia, leaving hospital against medical advice and previous hospitalisations. CONCLUSIONS: Postdischarge mortality rates are often as high as in-hospital mortality, yet remain largely unaddressed. Most children who die following discharge do so at home, suggesting that interventions applied prior to discharge are ideal to addressing this neglected cause of mortality. The development, therefore, of evidence-based, risk-guided, interventions must be a focus to achieve the sustainable development goals.
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 | 0.013 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".