MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411576424 · doi:10.1111/1475-6773.70002

Regionalization of Hip Fracture Care in Five High‐Income Countries

2025· article· en· W4411576424 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pieter Bakx, Carlos Godoy, Saeed Al‐Azazi, Amitava Banerjee, Nitzan Burrack, David Kuklinski, Christina Fu, Laura A. Hatfield, Asa R. Hartman, Nicole Huang, Dennis T. Ko, Lisa M. Lix, Dominik Moser, Victor Novack, Laura Pasea, Feng Qiu, Kieran L. Quinn, Bheeshma Ravi, Thérèse A. Stukel, Carin A. Uyl‐de Groot, Bruce E. Landon, Peter Cram

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare InnovationUniversity of TorontoSinai Health SystemSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsHip fractureMedicineOsteoporosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in regionalization of hip fracture care and the volume-outcome relationship in five countries. STUDY SETTING AND DESIGN: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional cohort study in Canada, Israel, the Netherlands, Taiwan, and the United States. Within each country, we stratified patients into quintiles based upon the volume of hip fractures in the hospital where they were treated. We measured regionalization by the proportion of acute-care hospitals that treated patients with hip fractures and summarized the hospital volume distribution by the ratio of hip fracture volumes for high-volume hospitals versus low-volume hospitals. We then examined age- and sex-standardized outcomes and treatment for patients treated at high-volume and low-volume hospitals. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE: We used nationally representative administrative data on adults aged ≥ 66 years hospitalized with hip fracture from 2011 to 2019. We followed them until death or 365 days after the discharge date. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Across countries, the percentage of all acute-care hospitals that treated hip fractures differed widely (from 37.0% in Canada to 82.8% in Israel), with high-volume hospitals treating 4-14 times as many hip fractures as low-volume hospitals. The absolute risk-adjusted difference in 30-day mortality for high-volume compared to low-volume hospitals ranged between (-1.9% [95% CI, -2.2 to -1.7] in Canada and +1.1% [95% CI, 0.4-1.8] in the Netherlands). The proportion of patients receiving non-operative fracture treatment was lower in high-volume hospitals than low-volume hospitals in all countries (-5.4% [95% CI, -6.5 to -4.3] in Israel to -0.1% [95% CI, -0.5 to 0.3] in the Netherlands). CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture regionalization differed substantially across countries. The direction and the magnitude of association between greater regionalization and improved patient outcomes were inconsistent across countries.

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)0.004
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.409 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Services ResearchSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207