Attributable Mortality of Hip Fracture in Older Patients: A Retrospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hip fracture (HF) in older patients is associated with a high six-month mortality rate. Several clinical conditions may affect outcome, including baseline characteristics, co-existing acute illnesses, perioperative factors, and postoperative complications. Our primary objective was to estimate the respective effect of these four domains on six-month mortality after HF. A retrospective observational study using a monocentric cohort of older patients was conducted. All patients ≥ 70 years old admitted to the emergency department for HF and hospitalized in our perioperative geriatric care unit from June 2009 to September 2018 were included. Among 1015 included patients, five (0.5%) were lost to follow-up, and 1010 were retained in the final analysis (mean age 86 ± 6 years). The six-month mortality rate was 14.8%. The six-month attributable mortality estimates were as follows: baseline characteristics (including age, gender, comorbidities, autonomy, type of fracture): 62.4%; co-existing acute illnesses (including acute events present before surgery that could result from the fracture or cause it): 0% (not significantly associated with six-month mortality); perioperative factors (including blood transfusion and delayed surgery): 12.3%; severe postoperative complications: 11.9%. Baseline characteristics explained less than two-thirds of the six-month mortality after HF. Optimizing patients care by improving management of perioperative factors and thus decreasing postoperative complications, could reduce by a maximum of one quarter of the six-month mortality rate after HF.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".