MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386070390 · doi:10.1186/s12877-023-04154-z

Monitoring the burden of COVID-19 and impact of hospital transfer policies on Australian aged-care residents in residential aged-care facilities in 2020

2023· article· en· W4386070390 on OpenAlexaff
Shruti Premshankar Nair, Ashley Quigley, Aye Moa, Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, C. Raina MacIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsKensington Health
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilAustralian Government
KeywordsMedicineOutbreakPopulationPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthMedical emergencyEmergency medicineFamily medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Residential aged-care facilities in Australia emerged as the high-risk setting the COVID-19 outbreaks due to community transmission. The vulnerable aged-care residents of these facilities suffered due to low hospital transfers and high mortality and morbidity rates. This study aimed to monitor and report the burden of COVID-19 in residential aged-care facilities across Australia and the impact of hospital transfer policies on resident hospitalisation during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study by collecting data from weekly aged-care outbreak reports published by open sources and official government sources between 1st March and 20th November 2020. A comprehensive line list of outbreaks was created using open-source data. The line list included the name of the facility, location, COVID-19 cases among residents, & staff, resident hospitalisations, mode of transmission, number of resident deaths, and state policies involving resident hospitalisation. We also searched the websites of these facilities to collect data on their COVID-19 policies for the residents, staff, and visitors. Statistical analyses were performed on the data obtained. RESULTS: 126 aged-care COVID-19 outbreaks were identified in Australia during the study period. The incidence rate of COVID-19 infections among aged-care residents in Australia was (1118.5 per 100,000 resident population) which is 10 times higher than the general population (107.6 per 100,000 population). The hospitalisation rate for aged-care residents in Australia was 0.93 per 100,000 population. The hospitalisation rate of aged-care residents in Victoria was 3.14 per 100,000 population despite having the highest COVID-19 cases. Excluding South Australia, all states followed ad-hoc case-by-case hospital transfer policies for aged-care residents. CONCLUSION: This study documented a higher risk of COVID-19 infection for aged-care residents and workers but found low hospitalisation rates among residents across Australia. The hospitalisation rates in Victoria were higher than the national average but low when considering the COVID-19 infection rates in the state. The hospitalisation rates could have been impacted due to the state hospital transfer policies at that time. Immediate transfer of infected residents to hospitals may improve their survival and reduce the risk of infection to the other residents, as healthcare settings have more advanced infection control measures and are well-equipped with trained staff and resources.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207