MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Population-Based Trends in Complexity of Hospital Inpatients

2024· letter· en· W4390662004 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Internal Medicine · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineEmergency medicinePolypharmacyPopulationEmergency departmentLogistic regressionAcute careCohortCohort studyConfidence intervalPediatricsChildbirthHealth carePregnancyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Clinical experience suggests that hospital inpatients have become more complex over time, but few studies have evaluated this impression. Objective: To assess whether there has been an increase in measures of hospital inpatient complexity over a 15-year period. Design, Setting and Participants: This cohort study used population-based administrative health data from nonelective hospitalizations from April 1, 2002, to January 31, 2017, to describe trends in the complexity of inpatients in British Columbia, Canada. Hospitalizations were included for individuals 18 years and older and for which the most responsible diagnosis did not correspond to pregnancy, childbirth, the puerperal period, or the perinatal period. Data analysis was performed from July to November 2023. Exposure: The passage of time (15-year study interval). Main Outcomes and Measures: Measures of complexity included patient characteristics at the time of admission (eg, advanced age, multimorbidity, polypharmacy, recent hospitalization), features of the index hospitalization (eg, admission via the emergency department, multiple acute medical problems, use of intensive care, prolonged length of stay, in-hospital adverse events, in-hospital death), and 30-day outcomes after hospital discharge (eg, unplanned readmission, all-cause mortality). Logistic regression was used to estimate the relative change in each measure of complexity over the entire 15-year study interval. Results: The final study cohort included 3 367 463 nonelective acute care hospital admissions occurring among 1 272 444 unique individuals (median [IQR] age, 66 [48-79] years; 49.1% female and 50.8% male individuals). Relative to the beginning of the study interval, inpatients at the end of the study interval were more likely to have been admitted via the emergency department (odds ratio [OR], 2.74; 95% CI, 2.71-2.77), to have multimorbidity (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.47-1.53) and polypharmacy (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.78-1.85) at presentation, to receive treatment for 5 or more acute medical issues (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 2.02-2.09), and to experience an in-hospital adverse event (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.19-1.22). The likelihood of an intensive care unit stay and of in-hospital death declined over the study interval (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97, and OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.83, respectively), but the risks of unplanned readmission and death in the 30 days after discharge increased (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.12-1.16, and OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.25-1.31, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: By most measures, hospital inpatients have become more complex over time. Health system planning should account for these trends.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.353 · 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