The associations between direct and delayed critical care unit admission with mortality and readmissions among patients with heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although greater than 20% of patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) are admitted to a critical care unit, associated outcomes, and costs have not been delineated. We determined 30-day mortality, 30-day readmissions, and hospital costs associated with direct or delayed critical care unit admission. METHODS: In a population-based analysis, we compared HF patients who were admitted to critical care directly from the emergency department (direct), after initial ward admission (delayed), or never admitted to critical care during their hospital stay (ward-only). RESULTS: Among 178,997 HF patients (median age 80 [IQR 71-86] years, 49.6% men) 36,175 (20.2%) were admitted to critical care during their hospitalization (April 2003 to March 2018). Critical care patients were admitted directly from the emergency department (direct, 81.9%) or after initial ward admission (delayed, 18.1%). Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause 30-day mortality were: 1.69 for direct (95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.55, 1.84) and 4.92 for delayed (95% CI; 4.26, 5.68) critical care-admitted compared to ward-only patients. Multivariable-adjusted repeated events analysis demonstrated increased risk for all-cause 30-day readmission with both direct (HR 1.04, 95% CI; 1.01, 1.08, P = .013) and delayed critical care unit admissions (HR 1.20, 95% CI; 1.13, 1.28, P < .001). Median 30-day costs were $12,163 for direct admissions, $20,173 for delayed admissions, and $9,575 for ward-only patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: While critical care unit admission indicates increased risk of mortality and readmission at 30 days, those who experienced delayed critical care unit admission exhibited the highest risk of death and highest costs of care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".