Older persons living with dementia and their use of acute care services over 2 years in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize transitions to acute and residential care and identify variables associated with specific transitions among community-based persons living with dementia (PLWD). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using primary care electronic medical record data linked with health administrative data. SETTING: Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 years or older living in the community who had been diagnosed with dementia and who saw a Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network contributor between January 1, 2013, and February 28, 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All emergency department visits, hospitalizations, residential care (supportive living and long-term care) admissions, and deaths within a 2-year follow-up period. RESULTS: In total, 576 PLWD were identified who had a mean (SD) age of 80.4 (7.7) years; 55% were female. In 2 years, 423 (73.4%) had at least 1 transition and, of these, 111 (26.2%) had 6 or more. Emergency department visits, including multiple visits, were common (71.4% had ≥1, 12.1% had ≥4). Of those hospitalized (43.8%), nearly all were admitted from the emergency department; the average (SD) length of stay was 23.6 (35.8) days, and 32.9% had at least 1 alternate level of care day. In total, 19.3% entered residential care, most admitted from hospital. Those admitted to hospital and those admitted to residential care were older and had greater historical health system use, including home care. One-quarter of the sample did not have any transitions (or die) during follow-up; they were typically younger and had limited historical health system use. CONCLUSION: Older PLWD experienced frequent, and frequently compound, transitions that have implications for them, their family members, and the health system. There was also a large proportion without transitions suggesting that appropriate supports enable PLWD to do well in their own communities. The identification of PLWD who are at risk of or who make frequent transitions may allow for more proactive implementation of community-based supports and smoother transitions to residential care.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".