MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3036430186 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035447

Appropriateness, effectiveness and safety of care delivered in Canadian hospitals: a longitudinal assessment on the utility of publicly reported performance trend data between 2012–2013 and 2016–2017

2020· article· en· W3036430186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Omid Fekri, Edgar Manukyan, Niek Klazinga

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyEmergency medicineInterrupted Time Series AnalysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of publicly reported performance trend results of Canadian hospitals (by hospital size/type and jurisdiction). DESIGN: Longitudinal observational study. SETTING: 489 hospitals in Canada between fiscal years 2012-2013 and 2016-2017. PARTICIPANTS: Analysis focused on indicator results of individual Canadian hospitals. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Eight outcome indicators of hospital performance: in-hospital mortality (2), readmissions (4) and adverse events (2). Performance trend outcomes of improving, weakening or no change over time. Comparators in performance by hospital size/type of above, below or same as average. RESULTS: At the national level, between 2012-2013 and 2016-2017, Canadian hospitals largely reduced in-hospital mortality: hospital deaths (hospital standardised mortality ratio) -9%; hospital deaths following major surgery -11.1%. Conversely, readmission to hospital increased nationwide: medical 1.5%; obstetric 5%; patients aged 19 years and younger 4.6% and surgical 3%. In-hospital sepsis declined -7.1%. Approximately 10% of the 489 hospitals in this study had a trend of improving performance over time (n=49) in one or more indicators, and a similar number showed a weakening performance over time (n=52). Roughly half of the hospitals in this study (n=224) had no change in performance over time for at least four out of the eight indicators. No single hospital had an improving or weakening trend in more than two indicators. Teaching and larger-sized hospitals showed a higher ratio of improving performance compared with smaller-sized hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of Canadian hospital performance through eight indicators shows improvement of in-hospital mortality and in-hospital sepsis, but rising rates of readmissions. Subdividing the analysis by hospital size/type shows greater instances of improvement in teaching and larger-sized hospitals. There is no clear pattern of a particular province/territory with a significant number of hospitals with improving or weakening trends. The overall assessment of trends of improving and weakening as presented in this study can be used more systematically in monitoring progress.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes→French-language works237,207→