MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391873566 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwad061.217

A217 EVALUATING PREDICTIVE SCORING AND OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS DISCHARGED HOME FROM THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT WITH UPPER GASTROINTESTINGAL BLEEDING

2024· article· en· W4391873566 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M Saunders, Michael Jones, Craig Lawlor, David W. Savage, Petros Zezos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences CentreNOSM University
FundersNorthern Ontario Academic Medicine Association
KeywordsEmergency departmentMedicineMedical emergencyEmergency medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB) is a common emergency department (ED) presentation. The Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score (GBS) is a validated tool for predicting UGIBs requiring admission for endoscopic evaluation. Utilization of GBS in Northern Ontario EDs may help risk stratify UGIB to decrease return to care. Aims This study aimed to evaluate factors and outcomes of patients discharged from the ED with suspected UGIB. Methods A total of 1,139 charts were identified with an ICD-10 ED diagnosis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage from 2016-2022. Of these, 92 charts met inclusion criteria. Patients admitted to hospital from the index ED visit, who were below the age of 18 years at the time of presentation, or with clinically suspected lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage were excluded. Patient were further grouped by place of residence if their primary address was within Thunder Bay city limits or not. Results There were 48 males (52%) with a median age of 58.7 (IQR 32.2) at presentation with UGIB to ED. The median (IQR) Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and GBS were 3 (5) and 3 (6), respectively. The odds ratio for returning to the ED and being admitted for UGIB within sixty days was 4.07 times greater for patients from the region compared to Thunder Bay residents (95% CI 1.28–12.97). GBS was found to be significantly greater (p=0.048, Mann-Whitney U-Test) among seven patients who underwent emergent endoscopy from the ED and were discharged home. In univariate K-M survival analysis, the mean survival time to hospital admission at sixty days was 45 days among those with a presenting GBS score of ampersand:003E3, compared to 57 days when GBS was 3 or less (pampersand:003C0.005, log rank Mantel-Cox). After adjustment for age, sex, place of residence, and CCI, there was a 17% increase in the expected hazard for hospital admission at sixty days for each point increase in GBS (95% CI 1.03–1.34). Similarly, the expected hazard for follow-up hospital admission was 2.95 times higher (95% CI 1.11–7.85) in patients living outside Thunder Bay travelling to seek care. There were no statistically significant hazards identified between age, sex, or CCI and hospital admission (Cox proportional hazards model, p=0.001). Of patients admitted to hospital within sixty days of ED discharge (n=17), the median length of stay was five days with 56% requiring blood transfusion and 83% receiving endoscopy. Conclusions Higher GBS scores and residence outside of Thunder Bay increase the likelihood of revisit and admission to hospital for UGIB following ED discharge. Future research will aim to compare outcomes among larger urban centers. Funding Agencies NOAMA

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)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207