MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367833933 · doi:10.1111/add.16218

All‐cause and cause‐specific mortality in individuals with an alcohol‐related emergency or hospital inpatient presentation: A retrospective data linkage cohort study

2023· article· en· W4367833933 on OpenAlexaff
Janni Leung, Vivian Chiu, Nicola Man, Wing See Yuen, Timothy Dobbins, Adrian Dunlop, Natasa Gisev, Wayne Hall, Sarah Larney, Sallie‐Anne Pearson, Louisa Degenhardt, Amy Peacock

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Drug and Alcohol Research CentreNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthSeqirusNSW Ministry of HealthIndiviorDepartment of Health and Aged Care, Australian GovernmentNational Coronial Information SystemUniversity of QueenslandUniversity of New South WalesCancer Institute NSWAustralian Government
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyCohortEmergency departmentPopulationCohort studyNational Death IndexMortality rateConfidence intervalDemographyPediatricsHazard ratioEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol consumption is a leading risk factor for premature mortality globally, but there are limited studies of broader cohorts of people presenting with alcohol-related problems outside of alcohol treatment services. We used linked health administrative data to estimate all-cause and cause-specific mortality among individuals who had an alcohol-related hospital inpatient or emergency department presentation. DESIGN: Observational study using data from the Data linkage Alcohol Cohort Study (DACS), a state-wide retrospective cohort of individuals with an alcohol-related hospital inpatient or emergency department presentation. SETTING: Hospital inpatient or emergency department presentation in New South Wales, Australia, between 2005 and 2014. PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised 188 770 individuals aged 12 and above, 66% males, median age 39 years at index presentation. MEASUREMENTS: All-cause mortality was estimated up to 2015 and cause-specific mortality (by those attributable to alcohol and by specific cause of death groups) up to 2013 due to data availability. Age-specific and age-sex-specific crude mortality rates (CMRs) were estimated, and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated using sex and age-specific deaths rates from the NSW population. FINDINGS: There were 188 770 individuals in the cohort (1 079 249 person-years of observation); 27 855 deaths were recorded (14.8% of the cohort), with a CMR of 25.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 25.5, 26.1] per 1000 person-years and SMR of 6.2 (95% CI = 5.4, 7.2). Mortality in the cohort was consistently higher than the general population in all adult age groups and in both sexes. The greatest excess mortality was from mental and behavioural disorders due to alcohol use (SMR = 46.7, 95% CI = 41.4, 52.7), liver cirrhosis (SMR = 39.0, 95% CI = 35.5, 42.9), viral hepatitis (SMR = 29.4, 95% CI = 24.6, 35.2), pancreatic diseases (SMR = 23.8, 95% CI = 17.9, 31.5) and liver cancer (SMR = 18.3, 95% CI = 14.8, 22.5). There were distinct differences between the sexes in causes of excess mortality (all causes fully attributable to alcohol female versus male risk ratio = 2.5 (95% CI = 2.0, 3.1). CONCLUSIONS: In New South Wales, Australia, people who came in contact with an emergency department or hospital for an alcohol-related presentation between 2005 and 2014 were at higher risk of mortality than the general New South Wales population during the same period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207