MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411036246 · doi:10.14740/gr2038

Impact of Hospital Teaching Status on Outcomes of Acute Cholangitis: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of Hospitalizations in the United States

2025· article· en· W4411036246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karan J. Yagnik, Raj H. Patel, Sneh Sonaiya, Charmy Parikh, Pranav Patel, Yash R. Shah, Umar Hayat, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Dhruvil Radadiya, Hareesha Rishab Bharadwaj, Doantrang Du, Ben Terrany, Dharmesh Kaswala, Bradley Confer, Harshit S. Khara

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePropensity score matchingIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Acute cholangitis (AC) is a serious condition caused by partial or complete obstruction of the common bile duct (CBD), leading to biliary tract infection. We aimed to evaluate whether teaching hospitals with trainees and non-teaching hospitals impact the outcome of AC in the United States. Methods: -tests was performed using SAS 9.4 software to analyze inpatient AC-associated mortality, inflation-adjusted total hospitalization costs (THC), and length of stay (LOS) in US teaching and non-teaching hospitals during the study period. Results: This study included a total of 30,300 patients, out of whom 23,535 (about 78%) were managed in teaching hospitals and 6,765 (about 22%) were managed in non-teaching hospitals. Primary outcomes showed a significant increase in mortality for patients managed in teaching hospitals (2.77% vs. 2.08%, P = 0.01) in comparison to non-teaching hospitals, hospital LOS was slightly higher in teaching hospitals (5 days (interquartile range (IQR): 3 - 6) vs. 4 days (IQR: 3 - 8)) and so did hospital cost ($15,259 vs. $14,506) in comparison to non-teaching hospitals. Secondary outcomes showed that patients in teaching hospitals had higher incidence of septic shock (16.06% vs. 12.53%, P < 0.0001), intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (6.61% vs. 5.07%, P = 0.0002), and intubation (5.30% vs. 3.46%, P < 0.0001) in comparison to non-teaching hospitals. Conclusion: Our study found higher mortality rates for AC patients in teaching hospitals compared to non-teaching hospitals. Teaching hospitals also had higher rates of septic shock, ICU admission, and intubation, with no difference in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) use. These differences could be due to several factors, such as greater resident and fellow autonomy in teaching hospitals and a potentially more proactive approach by physicians in non-teaching hospitals. Additionally, teaching hospitals often manage more complex, higher-acuity cases, which could contribute to worse outcomes.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.362 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersFrench-language works237,207