MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286211338 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000005623

Variation in Bed-to-Physician Ratios During Weekday Daytime Hours in ICUs in Australia and New Zealand*

2022· article· en· W4286211338 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Wunsch, David Pilcher, Edward Litton, Matthew Anstey, Allan Garland, Hayley B. Gershengorn

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba HealthSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensivistMedicineInterquartile rangeStaffingIntensive care unitEmergency medicineIntensive careRetrospective cohort studyAnesthesiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine common "bed-to-physician" ratios during weekday hours across ICUs and assess factors associated with variability in this ratio. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: All ICUs in Australia/New Zealand that participated in a staffing survey administered in 2017-2018. PATIENTS: ICU admissions from 2016 to 2018. METHODS: We linked survey data with patient-level data. We defined: 1) bed-to-intensivist ratio as the number of usually available ICU beds divided by the number of onsite weekday daytime intensivists; and 2) bed-to-physician ratio as the number of available ICU beds divided by the total number of physicians (intensivists + nonintensivists, including trainees). We calculated the median and interquartile range (IQR) of bed-to-intensivist ratio and bed-to-physician ratios during weekday hours. We assessed variability in each by type of hospital and ICU and by severity of illness of patients, defined by the predicted hospital mortality. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 123 (87.2%) of Australia/New Zealand ICUs that returned staffing surveys, 114 (92.7%) had an intensivist present during weekday daytime hours, and 116 (94.3%) reported at least one nonintensivist physician. The median bed-to-intensivist ratio was 8.0 (IQR, 6.0-11.4), which decreased to a bed-to-physician ratio of 3.0 (IQR, 2.2-4.9). These ratios varied with mean severity of illness of the patients in the unit. The median bed-to-intensivist ratio was highest (13.5) for ICUs with a mean predicted mortality > 2-4%, and the median bed-to-physician ratio was highest (5.7) for ICUs with a mean predicted mortality of > 4-6%. Both ratios decreased and plateaued in ICUs with a mean predicted mortality for patients greater than 8% (median bed-to-intensivist ratio range, 6.8-8.0, and bed-to-physician ratio range of 2.4-2.7). CONCLUSIONS: Weekday bed-to-physician ratios in Australia/New Zealand ICUs are lower than the bed-to-intensivist ratios and have a relatively fixed ratio of less than 3 for units taking care of patients with a higher average severity of illness. These relationships may be different in other countries or healthcare systems.

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)0.001
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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207