MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075658645

Impact of individualized care on readmissions after a hospitalization for acute exacerbation of COPD

2016· other· en· W7075658645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCOPDExacerbationHospital readmissionAcute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseasePulmonary diseaseBody mass indexHospital admissionAcute hospitalCopd exacerbation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simon L Adamson,1 Jane Burns,1,2 Pat G Camp,1,2 Don D Sin,1,3 Stephan F van Eeden1,31The Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, St Paul’s Hospital, University of British Columbia, 2Department of Physical Therapy, 3Division of Respirology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CanadaBackground: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) increase COPD morbidity and mortality and impose a great burden on health care systems. Early readmission following a hospitalization for AECOPD remains an important clinical problem. We examined how individualized comprehensive care influences readmissions following an index hospital admission for AECOPD.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data of patients admitted for AECOPD to two inner-city teaching hospitals to determine the impact of a comprehensive and individualized care management strategy on readmissions for AECOPD. The control group consisted of 271 patients whose index AECOPD occurred the year before the comprehensive program, and the experimental group consisted of 191 patients who received the comprehensive care. The primary outcome measure was the total number of readmissions in 30- and 90-day postindex hospitalizations. Secondary outcome measures included the length of time between the index admission and first readmission and all-cause mortality.Results: The two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, body mass index (BMI), pack-years, and the number and types of comorbidities. Comprehensive care significantly reduced 90-day readmission rates in females (P=0.0205, corrected for age, BMI, number of comorbidities, substance abuse, and mental illness) but not in males or in the whole group (P>0.05). The average times between index admission and first readmission were not different between the two groups. Post hoc multivariate analysis showed that substance abuse (P<0.01) increased 30- and 90-day readmissions (corrected for age, sex, BMI, number of comorbidities, and mental illness). The 90-day all-cause in-hospital mortality rates were significantly less in the care package group (2.67% versus 7.97%, P=0.0268).Conclusion: Comprehensive individualized care for subjects admitted to hospital for AECOPD did not reduce 30- and 90-day readmission rates but did reduce 90-day total mortality. Interestingly, it reduced 90-day readmission rate in females. We speculate that an individualized care package could impact COPD morbidity and mortality after an acute exacerbation.Keywords: readmissions, care package, substance abuse, female, mortality

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207