Discharge against Medical Advice in Eight Tertiary Hospitals in Nigeria: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Discharge against medical advice (DAMA) is when a patient decides to leave the hospital without the consent of the treating physician. It poses serious clinical, ethical, and legal challenges to the individual physician as well as the hospital. AIM: To determine the prevalence and reasons for DAMA in orthopedic departments of eight tertiary hospitals in Nigeria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective multi-center descriptive study undertaken in eight tertiary Nigerian hospitals. Consecutive patients who requested for DAMA within 1 year of the study and who consented to participate in the study had face-to-face interviews. Data obtained were documented in a questionnaire and analyzed with SPSS version 20. RESULTS: The total number of patients studied was 373 with a mean age 34.7 ± 17.5 years. About a quarter of them (25.5%) were between 31 and 40 years. A prevalence rate of 1.9% was found with financial constraint being the predominant reason for DAMA (40.8%). Other reasons include family preference for unorthodox treatment (18.8%) and treatment dissatisfaction (7.0%) among others. CONCLUSION: The study findings indicate a low DAMA rate when compared to previous studies in this region. It also indicates that financial constraints, family preference for unorthodox care, and low educational status are major drivers of DAMA. Deepened health insurance and other measures that can reduce the prevalence of DAMA should be prioritized to improve treatment outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".