Diverging pathways: exploring the interplay between hospital readmission and postdischarge mortality in paediatric sepsis in low-income settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mortality and readmission rates are high in low-income countries following hospital discharge; however, few studies have studied the relationship between these outcomes. Hospital readmission is a complex outcome as it reflects illness severity and health-seeking behaviour. This study aims to better understand the heterogeneous nature of hospital readmission, especially as it pertains to mortality. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a prospective, multisite, observational cohort study included children aged 0-60 months old admitted to hospital with suspected sepsis. We used Fine-Gray models and Cox proportional hazards regression to identify and contrast risk factors for readmission and postdischarge mortality. We also compared the risk ratio of the two outcomes across several domains, including diagnosis, postdischarge time period and study site. RESULTS: Of 6074 children discharged, 376 (6.2%) died, while 1106 (18.2%) were readmitted shortly after discharge. The median time to death and readmission was 28 (IQR: 9-74) and 79.5 (IQR: 30-130) days, respectively. A few patient characteristics, such as prior care seeking and hypoxaemia, were associated with both mortality and readmission. However, other characteristics, such as malnutrition (adjusted HR (aHR): 5.58 (95% CI: 4.20 to 7.43)), HIV (aHR: 1.89 (95% CI: 1.20 to 2.98)) and unplanned discharge (aHR: 3.31 (95% CI: 2.61 to 4.21)), were strongly predictive of postdischarge mortality but not readmission (aSHR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56 to 0.81), 0.64 (95% CI: 0.40 to 1.00) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.98), respectively). The overall rate ratio of readmission to postdischarge mortality was 3.12 (95% CI: 2.77 to 3.50) and increased over time, mostly due to decreasing mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Readmission as an outcome measure reflects perceived illness severity, health system capacity and complex healthcare-seeking behaviour. Unlike mortality, readmission is not a reliable surrogate for recurrent illness and should not be used as a primary measure of impact for programmes aiming to improve postdischarge 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".