Recent functional decline and outpatient follow-up after hospital discharge: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Functional decline is common following acute hospitalization and is associated with hospital readmission, institutionalization, and mortality. Early physician follow-up has the potential to prevent poor outcomes and is integral to high-quality transitional care. Our study sought to determine whether functional decline was associated with post-discharge follow-up and whether this association changed following COVID-19, given that both functional decline and COVID-19 may affect access to post-discharge care. Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We included patients over 65 who were discharged from an acute care facility during March 1st, 2019 – January 31st, 2020 (pre-COVID-19 period), and March 1st, 2020 – January 31st, 2021 (COVID-19 period), and who were assessed for home care while in hospital. Patients with and without functional decline were compared. Our primary outcome was any physician follow-up visit within 7 days of discharge. Results: Our study included 21,771 (pre-COVID) and 17,248 (COVID) hospitalized patients, of whom 15,637 (71.8%) and 12,965 (75.2%) had recent functional decline. Our propensity-weighted cohorts included 15637/15810 patients with/without function decline in the pre-COVID-19 period and 12965/13132 with/without functional decline in the COVID-19 period. Pre-COVID, there was no difference in physician follow-up within 7 days of discharge (Exposed 45.0% vs Unexposed 44.0%; RR=1.02, 95% CI 0.98 – 1.06). These results did not change in the COVID-19 period (Exposed 51.1% vs. Unexposed 49.4%; RR=1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.08, Z-test for interaction p=0.72). In the COVID-19 cohort, functional decline was associated with having a 7-day physician virtual visit (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.08 – 1.24) and a 7-day physician home visit (RR 1.64; 95% CI 1.10 – 2.43). Conclusions: Functional decline was not associated with reduced 7-day post-discharge physician follow-up in either the pre-COVID-19 or COVID-19 periods. In the COVID-19 period, functional decline was positively associated with 7-day virtual and home-visit follow-up.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".