Emergency Department Use in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Data Linkage Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of emergency department (ED) consultations in children with cerebral palsy (CP) compared to controls and factors predictive of ED consultations. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study linked data from the Registre de la paralysie cérébrale du Québec (REPACQ) and provincial administrative health databases. The CP cohort was comprised of children enrolled in REPACQ born between 1999 and 2002. REPACQ covers 6 of 17 Quebec health administrative regions. Region-, age-, and gender-matched controls were identified from administrative health databases in a 20:1 ratio. The primary outcome was high use of ED services (≥4 ED visits during the study period). Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 301 children with CP were linked to administrative data and 6040 peer controls were selected. Ninety-two percent (92%) of the CP cohort had at least one ED visit in the study period, compared to 74% among controls (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.19-1.28). Children with CP were more likely than their peers to have high ED use (RR 1.40; 95% CI 1.30-1.52). Factors predictive of high ED use were comorbid epilepsy (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.04-1.46) and severity of motor impairment (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.95-1.37). CONCLUSION: Children with CP are more likely to present to the ED than their peers, resulting in increased use of ED services. Coordinated care with improved access to same-day evaluations could decrease ED use. Health system factors and barriers should be investigated to ensure optimal and appropriate use of ED services.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".