ArticleScientific reports2023
Predictors of frequency of 1-year readmission in adult patients with diabetes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is the third most common chronic condition associated with frequent hospital readmissions. Predictors of the number of readmissions within 1 year among patients with DM are less often studied compared with those of 30-day readmission. This study aims to identify predictors of number of readmissions within 1 year amongst adult patients with DM and compare different count regression models with respect to model fit. Data from 2008 to 2015 were extracted from the electronic medical records of the National University Hospital, Singapore. Inpatients aged ≥ 18 years at the time of index admission with a hospital stay > 24 h and survived until discharge were included. The zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) model was fitted and compared with three other count models (Poisson, zero-inflated Poisson and negative binomial) in terms of predicted probabilities, misclassification proportions and model fit. Adjusted for other variables in the model, the expected number of readmissions was 1.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07 to 1.90) for peripheral vascular disease, 1.60 (95% CI 1.34 to 1.92) for renal disease and 2.37 (95% CI 1.67 to 3.35) for Singapore residency. Number of emergency visits, number of drugs and age were other significant predictors, with length of stay fitted as a zero-inflated component. Model comparisons suggested that ZINB provides better prediction than the other three count models. The ZINB model identified five patient characteristics and two comorbidities associated with number of readmissions. It outperformed other count regression models but should be validated before clinical adoption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.