MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393987856 · doi:10.1111/aas.14418

The impact of frailty and rapid response team activation on patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A case‐control matched, observational, single‐centre cohort study

2024· article· en· W4393987856 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christopher Dugan, Suzanne Weightman, Vanessa Palmer, Luis Schulz, Anders Åneman

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care unitObservational studyHazard ratioEmergency departmentProportional hazards modelRetrospective cohort studyEmergency medicineCohort studyAPACHE IICohortRisk of mortalityInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a multi-dimensional syndrome associated with mortality and adverse outcomes in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Further investigation is warranted to explore the interplay among factors such as frailty, clinical deterioration triggering a medical emergency team (MET) review, and outcomes following admission to the ICU. METHODS: Single-centre, retrospective observational case-control study of adult patients (>18 years) admitted to a medical-surgical ICU with (cases) or without (controls) a preceding MET review between 4 h and 14 days prior. Matching was performed for age, ICU admission diagnosis, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III (APACHE III) score and the 8-point Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Cox proportional hazard regression modelling was performed to determine associations with 30-day mortality after admission to ICU. RESULTS: A total of 2314 matched admissions were analysed. Compared to non-frail patients (CFS 1-4), mortality was higher in all frail patients (CFS 5-8), at 31% vs. 13%, and in frail patients admitted after MET review at 33%. After adjusting for age, APACHE, antecedent MET review and CFS in the Cox regression, mortality hazard ratio increased by 26% per CFS point and by 3% per APACHE III point, while a MET review was not an independent predictor. Limitations of medical treatment occurred in 30% of frail patients, either with or without a MET antecedent, and this was five times higher compared to non-frail patients. CONCLUSION: Frail patients admitted to ICU have a high short-term mortality. An antecedent MET event was associated with increased mortality but did not independently predict short-term survival when adjusting for confounding factors. The intrinsic significance of frailty should be primarily considered during MET review of frail patients. This study suggests that routine frailty assessment of hospitalised patients would be helpful to set goals of care when admission to ICU could be considered.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Anaesthesiologica ScandinavicaSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207