MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390141850 · doi:10.61440/jcpn.2023.v1.08

The Relationship between Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatric Patients and Readmission Rate to an Inpatient Facility

2023· article· en· W4390141850 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cherilyn Isis Schuff, Patrick J Aragon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineCognitive impairmentMedical recordNeuropsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary intention of this study was to further understand the impact of assessing cognitive impairment in psychiatric patients, as a mediating factor on readmission rates. Mild cognitive dysfunction impacts a patient’s functional outcomes [1,2]. Little information exists to guide best practices in the treatment of adults with cognitive impairment who are hospitalized for acute conditions [2]. A cognitive impairment may impact patient prognosis and ability to function outside of a setting focused on stabilization. Neuropsychological testing is a valuable tool in predicting a patient’s cognitive potential. However, creating a battery of tests that must be short enough to fit the needs of patients within an inpatient setting, allowing them to demonstrate their ability, while still providing enough information for accurate diagnosis and prognosis is a challenge. Overall, this study aimed to investigate the utilization of brief cognitive screeners in identifying patients that may be more vulnerable to relapse and readmission. Cognitive impairment was assessed utilizing the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Readmission rate is defined by total admissions per individual patient. The use of community resources, such as medication management, case management, housing programs, and their relationship with readmission rates was examined. Archival data was taken from an inpatient facility’s HIPAA-compliant electronic medical record (EMR) database. All personal identifying information was de-identified to ensure minimal risk of breaching confidentiality. Although all objectives demonstrated significant correlations among the variables, there were no significant predictive models. This study found a positive linear relationship between admission rate and a higher MoCA score. This may partially be explained by Age (M = 69.09, SD = 8.25) having a negative relationship with inpatient readmission rate and a positive relationship with community resources. Within the inpatient setting, patients with higher cognitive functioning may be more aware of their mental health symptoms and are more likely to seek help. This may lead to more frequent admissions as they are able to seek help to address their mental health concerns. The relationship between patient demographics, community resource usage, and readmission rate was also examined. Limitations of this study included the use of archival data, a small sample size, and a lack of diversity within the sample. Future directions for research include norming the MoCA for psychiatric populations and examining deficit patterns within the cognitive domains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→