MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282970648 · doi:10.2196/33921

Associations Between Family Member Involvement and Outcomes of Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: Retrospective Cohort Study

2022· article· en· W4282970648 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tamryn F. Gray, Anne Kwok, M. Khuyen, Sandra Zeng, Edward T. Moseley, Yasser M Dbeis, Renato Umeton, James A. Tulsky, Areej El‐Jawahri, Charlotta Lindvall

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseMedicineRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care unitOdds ratioMedical recordCohortCohort studyPediatricsOddsEmergency medicineLogistic regressionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little is known about family member involvement, by relationship status, for patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: Using documentation of family interactions in clinical notes, we examined associations between child and spousal involvement and ICU patient outcomes, including goals of care conversations (GOCCs), limitations in life-sustaining therapy (LLST), and 3-month mortality. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort design, the study included a total of 858 adult patients treated between 2008 and 2012 in the medical ICU at a tertiary care center in northeastern United States. Clinical notes generated within the first 48 hours of admission to the ICU were used with standard machine learning methods to predict patient outcomes. We used natural language processing methods to identify family-related documentation and abstracted sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the patients from the medical record. RESULTS: Most of the 858 patients were White (n=650, 75.8%); 437 (50.9%) were male, 479 (55.8%) were married, and the median age was 68.4 (IQR 56.5-79.4) years. Most patients had documented GOCC (n=651, 75.9%). In adjusted regression analyses, child involvement (odds ratio [OR] 0.81; 95% CI 0.49-1.34; P=.41) and child plus spouse involvement (OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.8-2.03; P=.3) were not associated with GOCCs compared to spouse involvement. Child involvement was not associated with LLST when compared to spouse involvement (OR 1.49; 95% CI 0.89-2.52; P=.13). However, child plus spouse involvement was associated with LLST (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.02-2.52; P=.04). Compared to spouse involvement, there were no significant differences in the 3-month mortality by family member type, including child plus spouse involvement (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.91-2.09; P=.13) and child involvement (OR 1.47; 95% CI 0.9-2.41; P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that statistical models derived from text analysis in the first 48 hours of ICU admission can predict patient outcomes. Early child plus spouse involvement was associated with LLST, suggesting that decisions about LLST were more likely to occur when the child and spouse were both involved compared to the involvement of only the spouse. More research is needed to further understand the involvement of different family members in ICU care and its association with 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207