Evaluating the Impact of a Risk Assessment System With Tailored Interventions in Germany: Protocol for a Prospective Study With Matched Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With a worldwide increase in the elderly population, and an associated increase in health care utilization and costs, preventing avoidable emergency department visits and hospitalizations is becoming a global priority. A personal emergency response system (PERS), consisting of an alarm button and a means to establish a live connection to a response center, can help the elderly live at home longer independently. Individual risk assessment through predictive modeling can help indicate what PERS subscribers are at elevated risk of hospital transport so that early intervention becomes possible. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to evaluate whether the combination of risk scores determined through predictive modeling and targeted interventions offered by a case manager can result in a reduction of hospital admissions and health care costs for a population of German PERS subscribers. The primary outcome of the study is the difference between the number of hospitalizations in the intervention and matched control groups. METHODS: As part of the Sicher Zuhause program, an intervention group of 500 PERS subscribers will be tracked for 8 months. During this period, risk scores will be determined daily by a predictive model of hospital transport, and at-risk participants may receive phone calls from a case manager who assesses the health status of the participant and recommends interventions. The health care utilization of the intervention group will be compared to a group of matched controls, retrospectively drawn from a population of PERS subscribers who receive no interventions. RESULTS: Differences in health care utilization and costs between the intervention group and the matched controls will be determined based on reimbursement records. In addition, qualitative data will be collected on the participants' satisfaction with the Sicher Zuhause program and utilization of the interventions offered as part of the program. CONCLUSIONS: The study evaluation will offer insight into whether a combination of predictive analytics and case manager-driven interventions can help in avoiding hospital admissions and health care costs for PERS subscribers in Germany living at home independently. In the future, this may lead to improved quality of life and reduced medical costs for the population of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS), DRKS00017328; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017328. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/17584.
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 | 0.034 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.005 |
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".