ArticleBMJ public health2026
Identifying subgroups of frequent emergency department users: a latent class analysis with linked healthcare utilisation, cost and mortality outcomes in the UK.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Frequent users (FUs) of emergency departments (EDs) attend repeatedly, placing a disproportionate burden on healthcare systems. Although known to be heterogeneous, there is limited international evidence characterising FU subpopulations or examining how healthcare costs and outcomes differ across groups. Advancing this understanding is important for developing tailored interventions to meet diverse care needs. Methods: FUs were defined as individuals with ≥5 ED attendances/year. We used two large UK datasets: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES, 2016-2019) and the Centre for Urgent and Emergency Care database (CUREd, 2017-2020). Together, these included over 148 000 FUs from 5 million ED users. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify FU subgroups based on attendance patterns, healthcare use and diagnostic characteristics. Results: We identified three consistent subgroups (HES and CUREd): (1) low-severity FUs (n=23 034, 43.2%; n=7081, 32.7%); (2) high-intensity FUs with mental health and neurological needs (n=6288, 11.8%; n=3456, 15.9%); (3) older FUs with chronic illness and high inpatient use (n=24 028, 45.0%; n=11 139, 51.4%). Subgroups differed substantially in healthcare utilisation, costs and mortality. A fourth class varied across datasets: in HES, it showed moderate morbidity and complex needs; in CUREd, high morbidity and high-intensity ED use. Discussion: This is the first FU study to apply LCA across large-scale, multiyear ED datasets, identifying a potentially universal subgroup structure. Current services focus on a narrow subset of high-intensity users. Additional tailored strategies are needed to address the full spectrum of FU needs.
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.