High costs and limited dietitian services for home enteral nutrition users: A Canadian study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is the provision of nutrition through a tube outside the hospital. The Canadian prevalence of HEN is not previously well understood. This study aimed to (1) describe the demographics and healthcare usage of HEN in adults in a Canadian health authority, (2) compare the proportion of HEN-related hospital visits between patients who did and did not receive a community registered dietitian (RD) follow-up, and (3) determine associations between demographic and healthcare usage of HEN adults . METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on the records of HEN patients with a tube placed between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2015. Descriptive and comparative statistics were applied. RESULTS: A total of 390 adults were discharged receiving HEN. The majority (74.9%, n = 271) of the sample did not have any record of visiting a community RD up to 6 years after tube placement. Fifty-three percent of the sample visited the hospital for HEN-related complications, costing CAD $14,324,465.00 (USD $10,677,946.00) to the healthcare system. Multiple regression analysis revealed that females ( P < .05), jejunostomy tubes ( P < .05), and older age ( P < .05) were associated with more hospital or emergency room visits. CONCLUSION: This study found a higher prevalence of HEN patients and more varied demographic and clinical characteristics than previously reported. The healthcare costs per patient per year exceed previous reports. Further research is needed to explore the population's experiences and develop interventions that improve gaps in the healthcare system.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".