MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121948562 · doi:10.4236/ojs.2021.111005

Analysis of Length of Stay (LOS) Data from the Medical Records of Tertiary Care Hospital in Saudi Arabia for Five Diagnosis Related Groups: Application of Cox Prediction Model

2021· article· en· W3121948562 on OpenAlexaff
Sara N. Algahtani, Mohamed M. Shoukri

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical recordProportional hazards modelEmergency medicineHazardRegression analysisMedical emergencyPediatricsInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: One of the main objectives of hospital managements is to control the length of stay (LOS). Successful control of LOS of inpatients will result in reduction in the cost of care, decrease in nosocomial infections, medication side effects, and better management of the limited number of available patients’ beds. The length of stay (LOS) is an important indicator of the efficiency of hospital management by improving the quality of treatment, and increased hospital profit with more efficient bed management. The purpose of this study was to model the distribution of LOS as a function of patient’s age, and the Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG), based on electronic medical records of a large tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: Information related to the research subjects were retrieved from a database of patients admitted to King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between January 2014 and December 2016. Subjects’ confidential information was masked from the investigators. The data analyses were reported visually, descriptively, and analytically using Cox proportional hazard regression model to predict the risk of long-stay when patients’ age and the DRG are considered as antecedent risk factors. Results: Predicting the risk of long stay depends significantly on the age at admission, and the DRG to which a patient belongs to. We demonstrated the validity of the Cox regression model for the available data as the proportionality assumption is shown to be satisfied. Two examples were presented to demonstrate the utility of the Cox model in this regard.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of StatisticsSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207