Prevalence, Outcomes and Healthcare Costs of Postoperative ARDS Compared with Medical ARDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Postoperative acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a recognized complication with reported prevalence rates of up to 20% and highly variable mortality. However, there is limited published evidence comparing the outcomes of postoperative ARDS with those of medical ARDS. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, hospital mortality, and healthcare costs of postoperative ARDS in Spain between 2000 and 2022 and to compare them with those of medical ARDS. Methods: We performed a nationwide, registry-based study of all hospitalizations for postoperative ARDS in Spain between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2022 using the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) Registry. Results: We identified a total of 93,192 ARDS patients, of which 40,601 had postoperative ARDS. The postoperative ARDS prevalence varied between 0.05 and 0.22%, accounting for 45–50% of total ARDS cases recorded during the study period. Hospital mortality was lower in postoperative ARDS compared with medical ARDS during the first phase (2000–2015) (47.0% vs. 49.9%, p < 0.001) and converged during the second phase (2017–2022) (42.7% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.413). Postoperative ARDS was associated with a longer hospital stay and 1.5 times higher healthcare costs compared with medical ARDS. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mortality rates declined but costs peaked in both groups. The incidence of digestive tract infection was higher in postoperative ARDS. Conclusions: The prevalence of postoperative ARDS remained stable, except during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its hospital mortality declined and equalized with that of medical ARDS. However, the costs associated with postoperative ARDS remained significantly higher.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".