MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Emergency Department Diagnostic Imaging at US Children’s Hospitals, 2016-2019

2021· article· en· W3123701928 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Children's HospitalHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteHealth Resources and Services AdministrationAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityChildren's Hospital FoundationNational Institutes of HealthCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationGeorgia Clinical and Translational Science AllianceHarvard Catalyst
KeywordsMedicineEthnic groupEmergency departmentConfoundingOdds ratioMedical diagnosisMagnetic resonance imagingOddsPediatricsLogistic regressionInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Diagnostic imaging is frequently performed as part of the emergency department (ED) evaluation of children. Whether imaging patterns differ by race and ethnicity is unknown. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic differences in the performance of common ED imaging studies and to examine patterns across diagnoses. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study evaluated visits by patients younger than 18 years to 44 US children's hospital EDs from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2019. Exposures: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic compared with non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of visits for each race/ethnicity group with at least 1 diagnostic imaging study, defined as plain radiography, computed tomography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging. The major diagnostic categories classification system was used to examine race/ethnicity differences in imaging rates by diagnoses. Results: A total of 13 087 522 visits by 6 230 911 children and adolescents (mean [SD] age, 5.8 [5.2] years; 52.7% male) occurred during the study period. Diagnostic imaging was performed during 3 689 163 visits (28.2%). Imaging was performed in 33.5% of visits by non-Hispanic White patients compared with 24.1% of visits by non-Hispanic Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.60-0.60) and 26.1% of visits by Hispanic patients (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.66-0.67). Adjusting for confounders, visits by non-Hispanic Black (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.82-0.83) and Hispanic (adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.87-0.87) patients were less likely to include any imaging study compared with visits by non-Hispanic White patients. Limiting the analysis to only visits by nonhospitalized patients, the adjusted OR for imaging was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.79-0.80) for visits by non-Hispanic Black patients and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.84-0.85) for visits by Hispanic patients. Results were consistent in analyses stratified by public and private insurance groups and did not materially differ by diagnostic category. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic children were less likely to receive diagnostic imaging during ED visits compared with non-Hispanic White children. Further investigation is needed to understand and mitigate these potential disparities in health care delivery and to evaluate the effect of these differential imaging patterns on patient outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.332
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