MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of Mechanical Ventilation Across 3 Countries

2023· article· en· W4382011174 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Internal Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineMechanical ventilationIntensive care unitPopulationCohortEmergency medicineDemographyPediatricsInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The ability to provide invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a mainstay of modern intensive care; however, whether rates of IMV vary among countries is unclear. Objective: To estimate the per capita rates of IMV in adults across 3 high-income countries with large variation in per capita intensive care unit (ICU) bed availability. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study examined 2018 data of patients aged 20 years or older who received IMV in England, Canada, and the US. Exposure: The country in which IMV was received. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the age-standardized rate of IMV and ICU admissions in each country. Rates were stratified by age, specific diagnoses (acute myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolus, upper gastrointestinal bleed), and comorbidities (dementia, dialysis dependence). Data analyses were conducted between January 1, 2021, and December 1, 2022. Results: The study included 59 873 hospital admissions with IMV in England (median [IQR] patient age, 61 [47-72] years; 59% men, 41% women), 70 250 in Canada (median [IQR] patient age, 65 [54-74] years; 64% men, 36% women), and 1 614 768 in the US (median [IQR] patient age, 65 [54-74] years; 57% men, 43% women). The age-standardized rate per 100 000 population of IMV was the lowest in England (131; 95% CI, 130-132) compared with Canada (290; 95% CI, 288-292) and the US (614; 95% CI, 614-615). Stratified by age, per capita rates of IMV were more similar across countries among younger patients and diverged markedly in older patients. Among patients aged 80 years or older, the crude rate of IMV per 100 000 population was highest in the US (1788; 95% CI, 1781-1796) compared with Canada (694; 95% CI, 679-709) and England (209; 95% CI, 203-214). Concerning measured comorbidities, 6.3% of admitted patients who received IMV in the US had a diagnosis of dementia (vs 1.4% in England and 1.3% in Canada). Similarly, 5.6% of admitted patients in the US were dependent on dialysis prior to receiving IMV (vs 1.3% in England and 0.3% in Canada). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that patients in the US received IMV at a rate 4 times higher than in England and twice that in Canada in 2018. The greatest divergence was in the use of IMV among older adults, and patient characteristics among those who received IMV varied markedly. The differences in overall use of IMV among these countries highlight the need to better understand patient-, clinician-, and systems-level choices associated with the varied use of a limited and expensive resource.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.287 · 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