MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

'Before Medically Advised’ Discharges Following Hospitalization for Asthma Exacerbation: Disparities in Treatment and Outcomes

2025· article· en· W4410273755 on OpenAlexaff
J. Henry Brems, Aparna Balasubramanian, Kevin J. Psoter, Mary Catherine Beach, Michelle N. Eakin, Emily Brigham, Tianshi David Wu, Nadia N. Hansel, Robert A. Wise, Meredith C. McCormack

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaExacerbationAsthma exacerbationsIntensive care medicineMEDLINEEmergency medicinePediatricsMedical emergencyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION Before medically advised (BMA) discharges – alternatively known as ‘against medical advice'—are associated with poor outcomes such as increased readmission among patients with asthma. However, it is unclear what factors contribute to these worsened outcomes or what care these patients receive upon discharge. In this study, we evaluated patterns of post-discharge care (i.e. medication prescriptions, referrals, and follow-up) after hospitalizations for asthma exacerbation among patients discharging BMA versus non-BMA. METHODS We developed a cohort using electronic health record data of patients ≥ 18 years old within the Johns Hopkins Health System who had an admission for asthma exacerbation, as defined by ICD-10 codes, and were discharged to home. All admissions were classified as either a BMA or planned (i.e. non-BMA) discharge according to their discharge disposition. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and 30-day readmission were compared between BMA and non-BMA discharges using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. We then evaluated the proportion of discharges in which the patient received each of the following at discharge: an oral steroid prescription, inhaled corticosteroid prescription, outpatient referral for any service, or scheduled follow-up with a primary care physician or pulmonologist within 14-days. Differences in each component of discharge care were compared using logistic regression models with clustered standard errors, adjusted for age, race, sex, length of stay, history of exacerbation, insurance, time of discharge, and medical center. RESULTS This cohort included 5,507 admissions for asthma exacerbation, of which 205 (3.7%) resulted in a BMA discharge. Compared to non-BMA discharges, those discharged BMA were younger (39 vs 48 years, p<0.001) with a higher area deprivation index (67 vs 50, p<0.001). Readmission at 30 days more commonly occurred after a BMA discharge (15 vs 10%, p=0.03). Compared to non-BMA discharges, those who discharged BMA were less likely to receive an oral steroid prescription (54% vs 76%, p<0.001 ), inhaled corticosteroid prescription (32% vs 49%, p<0.001), outpatient referral (9% vs 34%, p<0.001), or scheduled 14-day follow-up (19% vs 27%, p=0.01) (Figure 1). All results were similar in adjusted models, and patients discharging BMA were particularly less likely to receive an outpatient prescription for oral steroids (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.18-0.35) CONCLUSIONS Compared to non-BMA discharges, patients discharged BMA following hospitalization for an asthma exacerbation were less likely to receive outpatient steroids, inhaled corticosteroids, referrals, or follow-up, and they more likely to be readmitted at 30 days. These treatment gaps present potential opportunities to improve care.

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)0.006
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.406 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesFrench-language works237,207