MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022853294 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-19-00751

Readmission Rates After Hip Fracture: Are There Prefracture Warning Signs for Patients Most at Risk of Readmission?

2020· article· en· W3022853294 on OpenAlexaff
Jake X. Checketts, Qingqing Dai, Lan Zhu, Zhuqi Miao, Scott Shepherd, Brent L. Norris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHip fractureLogistic regressionUnivariateMultivariate statisticsMultivariate analysisExact testUnivariate analysisEmergency medicineEmergency departmentRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineStatisticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate known and yet unknown risk factors associated with readmission to the hospital within 30 days after hip fracture. METHODS: In this study, we used the Cerner Health Facts Electronic Health Record database data from January to August 2015. The univariate association of each variable (discharge location, demographic details, and comorbidities) against the 30-day readmission status was evaluated using the Chi-square test or the Fisher exact test. The significant variables (P < 0.05) obtained by the univariate analysis were used to build the multivariate logistic regression model to evaluate the multivariate associations of the variables. RESULTS: Thirty-four thousand seven hundred ninety index admissions of 33,740 unique patients were included in the study cohort. The overall 30-day readmission rate for patients with hip fractures was 10.7%. We demonstrated a new variable not discussed in previous articles on this topic: patients with previous inpatient/emergency visits within the past year were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days after the hip fracture surgery (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: For patients with hip fractures, particular efforts should be taken to optimize outcomes in those with recent hospitalizations and/or discharge to a location other than home.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207