MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390108454 · doi:10.1177/21501319231220742

Multistate Competing Risk Analysis of Transition Back to the Community Among Long-Term Care Home (LTC) Destined Patients: A Brief Report

2023· article· en· W4390108454 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bonaventure Amandi Egbujie, Jake Tran, John P. Hirdes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Primary Care & Community Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsGrace (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLong-term careGerontologyTerm (time)Primary careTransition (genetics)Family medicinePediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The demand for long-term care in community and facilitybased settings in Canada is expected to increase with population growth. The Toronto Grace Health Center piloted an intervention program that aims to support return to the community of acute hospital patients designated for LTC placement. We investigated whether this program was effective in transitioning the program patients back to their homes in the community and the factors associated with transitioning patients to different destinations. METHOD: We performed a competing risk multi-state analysis of 111 patients enrolled into the Harbour Light (HL) transitional unit program between January 2020 and June 2023. RESULTS: At the time of the study, 92 enrolled patients had been discharged and of those these, 48.9% (45) were successfully transitioned back to their private home in the community. The remaining 51.1% (46) were discharged to other destinations. Being a female was the only positive predictor of transitioning back home. Higher CPS scores (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.88), PADDRS scale of 1+, and higher ADL Hierarchy scale, strongly predicted lower odds of transitioning back to the community. CONCLUSION: Within the context of rising LTC bed demand and lengthy waiting time in Canada, with appropriate measures, this program successfully transitioned LTC home bound persons back to their homes. If replicable on a large scale, this could provide short and long-term solution to LTC bed demand in Canada.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Primary Care & Community HealthSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207