Examining the effects of race/ethnicity and other factors on outcomes of care for complex regional pain syndrome type 1 in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complex regional pain syndrome is a chronic pain disorder marked by symptoms such as swelling, impaired motor function, and sympathetic dysfunction. Our primary objective was to determine the total number of complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-1) emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations by race/ethnicity, as well as to assess sex and age distributions by race/ethnicity. Secondary objectives were to examine whether race/ethnicity, as well as select characteristics, are associated with hospitalization and longer length of stay. We completed a cross-sectional study of adults (19+ years) using acute and inpatient care data from the 2020 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample and the National Inpatient Sample. The overall rate of CRPS-1 diagnosis among ED visits and hospitalizations was 0.02% and 0.04%, respectively. Most CRPS-1 care was provided to White (ED: 83.1%; inpatient: 82.8%) patients. Within race/ethnicity groups, CRPS-1 ED visits and hospitalizations generally increased with age. Secondary findings included: 1) ED visits by Black individuals (compared with White) were significantly negatively associated with immediate hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99); 2) hospitalizations by Black patients (compared with White) were independently associated with increased length of stay (odds ratio (OR) 1.45, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.96), though the association diminished with adjustment; and 3) drug abuse was significantly associated with hospitalization (AOR 4.67, 95% CI 3.53 to 6.18) and longer length of stay (AOR 1.81, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.46). Race/ethnicity was minimally associated with studied CRPS-1 outcomes. Additional studies are required to determine the impact of race/ethnicity on seeking care for CRPS-1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".