MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403135741 · doi:10.3390/healthcare12191982

A Comparative Study of Hospitalization Mortality Rates between General and Emergency Hospitalized Patients Using Survival Analysis

2024· article· en· W4403135741 on OpenAlexaff
Haegak Chang, Seiyoung Ryu, Ilyoung Choi, Angela Eunyoung Kwon, Jaekyeong Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionProportional hazards modelEmergency medicineSurvival analysisOrdered logitEstimationMedical recordEmergency departmentMedical emergencyInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: In Korea's emergency medical system, when an emergency patient arises, patients receive on-site treatment and care during transport at the pre-hospital stage, followed by inpatient treatment upon hospitalization. From the perspective of emergency patient management, it is critical to identify the high death rate of patients with certain conditions in the emergency room. Therefore, it is necessary to compare and analyze the determinants of the death rate of patients admitted via the emergency room and generally hospitalized patients. In fact, previous studies investigating determinants of survival periods or length of stay (LOS) primarily used multiple or logistic regression analyses as their main research methodology. Although medical data often exhibit censored characteristics, which are crucial for analyzing survival periods, the aforementioned methods of analysis fail to accommodate these characteristics, presenting a significant limitation. METHODS: Therefore, in this study, survival analyses were performed to investigate factors affecting the dying risk of general inpatients as well as patients admitted through the emergency room. For this purpose, this study collected and analyzed the sample cohort DB for a total of four years from 2016 to 2019 provided by the Korean National Health Insurance Services (NHIS). After data preprocessing, the survival probability was estimated according to sociodemographic, patient, health checkup records, and institutional features through the Kaplan-Meier survival estimation. Then, the Cox proportional hazards models were additionally utilized for further econometric validation. RESULTS: As a result of the analysis, in terms of the 'city' feature among the sociodemographic characteristics, the small and medium-sized cities exert the most influence on the death rate of general inpatients, whereas the metropolitan cities exert the most influence on the death rate of inpatients admitted through the emergency room. In terms of institution characteristics, it was found that there is a difference in determinants affecting the death rate of the two groups of study, such as the number of doctors per 100 hospital beds, the number of nurses per 100 hospital beds, the number of hospital beds, the number of surgical beds, and the number of emergency beds. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the study results, it is expected that an efficient plan for distributing limited medical resources can be established based on inpatients' LOS.

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)0.000
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207