↓ Skip to main content

Classifying general medicine readmissions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 1996
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Classifying general medicine readmissions
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 1996
DOI 10.1007/bf02599027
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Z. Oddone, M. Weinberger, M. Horner, C. Mengel, F. Goldstein, P. Ginier, D. Smith, J. Huey, N. J. Farber, D. A. Asch, L. Loo, E. Mack, A. Giobbie Hurder, W. Henderson, J. R. Feussner, the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies in Health Services Group on Primary Care and Hospital Readmissions

Abstract

To describe a new quality assessment method used to classify the preventability of hospitalization in terms of patient, clinician, or system factors. The instrument was developed in two phases. Phase 1 was a prospective comparison of admitting residents' and their attending physicians' classifications of the perceived preventability of consecutive admissions to one Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) excluding admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU). In phase 2, a panel of 10 physicians rated 811 abstracted records of readmissions from nine VAMCs. Nine VAMCs across the United States with varying degrees of university hospital affiliation. Phase 1, 156 patients admitted to the general medicine service at the Durham VAMC. Phase 2, 514 patients accounting for 811 readmissions within 6 months of a general medicine service discharge at nine VAMCs. Physicians used a checklist to record the reason for hospitalization, the preventability of the hospitalization, and, if preventable, a reason defining preventability, which was classified in terms of system, clinician, and patient factors. In phase 2, two physician panelists assessed preventability for each chart. When two panelists disagreed on the preventability of hospitalization, a third panelist, blind to the original assessments, rated the chart. In phase 1, residents and attending physicians rated 33% and 34% of admissions as preventable (kappa = 0.41), respectively. In phase 2, 277 (34%) of 811 readmissions were deemed preventable. Intraobserver accuracy for the assessment of preventability was 96% (kappa = 0.89). interobserver accuracy was 73% (kappa = 0.43). Hospital system factors accounted for 37% of preventable readmissions, clinician factors for 38%, and patient factors for 21%. The nine hospitals differed markedly in their profile of reasons for preventable readmissions (p = .005). Using a new method of determining the preventability of hospitalizations, we identified several factors that might avert hospitalizations. Focusing efforts to identify preventable hospitalizations may yield better methods for managing patients' total health care needs; however, the content of those efforts will vary by institution.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 36%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Student > Postgraduate 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 55%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2015.
All research outputs
#5,104,656
of 24,185,663 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,148
of 7,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,899
of 29,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,185,663 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 29,239 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.