A5 ADMISSION AND RE-ADMISSION FOR UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING ARE MORE COMMON IN REGIONS UNDERREPRESENTED BY GASTROENTEROLOGISTS: A POPULATION BASED COHORT STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Lack of access to gastroenterologists may influence outcomes for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Aims To evaluate admission and re-admissions for patients with UGIB across the five health zones in Alberta that vary by access to local gastroenterologists. Methods Administrative databases identified all patients presenting to an emergency department with an UGIB who were admitted to hospital in Alberta from 2010 to 2015 (n = 17143). Admissions were stratified based the patients’ residence: Calgary, Edmonton, South, Central and North. Log-linear regression assessed an Average Annual Percentage Change (AAPC) in the incidence of UGIB hospitalizations with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). Endoscopy and readmission to hospital within 30 days of discharge was evaluated. Results The per capita number of gastroenterologists was highest in Calgary (3.9 per 100,000) and Edmonton (3.8) as compared to Central (0.84), South (0.66), and North (0.41). Incidence of hospital admission for UGIB decreased in Alberta (AAPC=-6.9%; 95%CI: -8.4,-5.4); though rates for UGIB in Calgary and Edmonton was less common than non-metropolitan zones (Figure 1). Patients living in Calgary and Edmonton had lower 30-day hospital readmission rate (4.30% and 4.84%) as compared to North (11.95%), Central (10.74%), and South (8.24%) (Table 1). Patients in Calgary and Edmonton underwent endoscopic evaluation more frequently (79.6% and 76.1%) than the North, Central, and South (68.41%, 66.3%, and 71.36%). Conclusions Patients presenting to emergency departments with UGIB were more likely to be admitted to hospital and subsequently be re-admitted within 30-days of discharge in regions underrepresented by gastroenterologists. Improving access to local gastroenterologists in may reduce the burden of hospitalizations for an UGIB. Funding Agencies Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Health System (PRIHS) funded by Alberta Health Services and Alberta Innovates
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".