ArticleAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2018
Comparing Statewide and Single-center Data to Predict High-frequency Emergency Department Utilization Among Patients With Asthma Exacerbation.
Article in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Missed Screening for Adverse Social Determinants of Health and Emergency Department Utilization.Annals of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Inhaled Corticosteroids Rarely Prescribed at Emergency Department Discharge Despite Low Rates of Follow-Up Care.The Journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Forecasting Future Asthma Hospital Encounters of Patients With Asthma in an Academic Health Care System: Predictive Model Development and Secondary Analysis Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Automatically Explaining Machine Learning Prediction Results on Asthma Hospital Visits in Patients With Asthma: Secondary Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Developing a Model to Predict Hospital Encounters for Asthma in Asthmatic Patients: Secondary Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Statistical tools used for analyses of frequent users of emergency department: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies examining high-frequency emergency department (ED) utilization have primarily used single-center data, potentially leading to ascertainment bias if patients visit multiple centers. The goals of this study were 1) to create a predictive model to prospectively identify patients at risk of high-frequency ED utilization for asthma and 2) to examine how that model differed using statewide versus single-center data.
methodsTo track ED visits within a state, we analyzed 2011 to 2013 data from the New York State Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Emergency Department Databases. The first year of data (2011) was used to determine prior utilization, 2012 was used to identify index ED visits for asthma and for demographics, and 2013 was used for outcome ascertainment. High-frequency utilization was defined as 4+ ED visits for asthma within 1 year after the index visit. We performed analyses separately for children (age < 21 years) and adults and constructed two models: one included all statewide (multicenter) visits and the other was restricted to index hospital (single-center) visits. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed from potential predictors selected a priori. The final model was chosen by evaluating model performance using Akaike's Information Criterion scores, 10-fold cross-validation, and receiver operating characteristic curves.
resultsAmong children, high-frequency ED utilization for asthma was observed in 2,417 of 94,258 (2.56%) using all statewide visits, compared to 1,853 of 94,258 (1.97%) for index hospital visits only. Among adults, the corresponding results were 7,779 of 159,874 (4.87%) and 5,053 of 159,874 (3.16%), respectively. In the multicenter visit model, the area under the curve (AUC) from 10-fold cross-validation for children was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69-0.72), compared to 0.71 (95% CI = 0.69-0.72) in the single-center visit model. The corresponding AUC results for adults were 0.76 (95% CI = 0.76-0.77) and 0.76 (95% CI = 0.75-0.77), respectively.
conclusionData available at the index ED visit can predict subsequent high-frequency utilization for asthma with AUC ranging from 0.70 to 0.76. Model accuracy was similar regardless of whether outcome ascertainment included all statewide visits (multicenter) or was limited to the index hospital (single-center).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.