MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981628986 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofz359.008

84. Evaluation of the NHSN Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) Risk Adjustment for HO-CDI in Oncology and ICU Patients in General Acute Care Hospitals

2019· article· en· W2981628986 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher R. Polage, Kathleen A. Quan, Keith Madey, F. M. Meyers, Sneha Krishna, Jonathan Grein, Laurel Gibbs, Deborah S. Yokoe, Shannon C Mabalot, Raymond Chinn, Amy Hallmark, Zachary Rubin, Michael Fontenot, Stuart L. Cohen, Debbra A. Wightman, David Birnbaum, Susan S. Huang, Francesca J. Torriani

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeEmergency medicineIntensive care unitReimbursementAcute careInternal medicineHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The NHSN healthcare-facility onset Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) standardized infection ratio (SIR) is used to compare hospital quality and set hospital reimbursement but inadequate risk adjustment could penalize hospitals unnecessarily. We hypothesized that general hospitals with large oncology and/or ICU populations were not fully adjusted in the 2015 NHSN acute care hospital CDI Laboratory-Identified (LabID) event prediction model and SIRs would be affected. Methods We validated a negative binomial regression HO-CDI event prediction model identical to the 2015 published model and used FY2016 data from eight general hospitals in California to test our hypothesis. We compared HO-CDI events and SIR values, with and without oncology/hematopoietic stem cell transplant or ICU unit events, patient-days, admissions, bed counts, and adjustment parameters included. Results Seven major teaching and one nonteaching general acute care hospitals were included (see Table). Eight had oncology/hematopoietic stem cell transplant units; seven had ≥43 ICU beds (median: 134; interquartile range [IQR]: 84–161). The median facility unmodified FacWideIn SIR was 1.23 [IQR: 1.15, 1.29]. Removal of oncology unit data resulted in a 15% median facility decrease in HO-CDI events (IQR: 14%, 21%) and −8% median facility decrease in SIR (IQR: −2%, −14%). Removal of ICU unit data resulted in a 22% median facility decrease in HO-CDI events (IQR: 16%, 26%) and 97% median facility increase in SIR at each facility (IQR: 78%, 105%). Conclusion The ICU bed adjustment in the 2015 NHSN SIR is a powerful correction that fully adjusted for ICU HO-CDI events at all hospitals in the study. However, the lack of risk adjustment for oncology/hematopoietic stem cell transplant unit HO-CDI events suggests that the current model unfairly penalizes general acute facilities, many of which also provide specialized oncologic care. Thus, the model needs to be re-adjusted to account for this important specialty care population in general acute care facilities. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207