The Mayo Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Admission Risk Score is Associated with Medical Resource Utilization During Hospitalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo determine whether the Mayo Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU) Admission Risk Score (M-CARS) is associated with CICU resource utilization.Patients and MethodsAdult patients admitted to our CICU from 2007 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed, and M-CARS was calculated from admission data. Groups were compared using Wilcoxon test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables.ResultsWe included 12,428 patients with a mean age of 67±15 years (37% female patients). The mean M-CARS was 2.1±2.1, including 5890 (47.4%) patients with M-CARS less than 2 and 644 (5.2%) patients with M-CARS greater than 6. Critical care restricted therapies were frequently used, including mechanical ventilation in 28.0%, vasoactive medications in 25.5%, and dialysis in 4.8%. A higher M-CARS was associated with greater use of critical-care therapies and longer CICU and hospital length of stay. The low-risk cohort with M-CARS less than 2 was less likely to require critical-care–restricted therapies, including invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation (8.0% vs 46.1%), vasoactive medications (10.1% vs 38.8%), or dialysis (1.0% vs 8.2%), compared with patients with M-CARS greater than or equal to 2 (all P<.001).ConclusionPatients with M-CARS less than 2 infrequently require critical-care resources and have extremely low mortality, suggesting that the M-CARS could be used to facilitate the triage of critically ill cardiac patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".