Exact(1)
We excluded the following admissions from analysis: those with MRSA isolated from the group of sites within the first 2 days of admission, since we wished to study nosocomial isolation inter-hospital transfers, since their total prior hospital stay was unknown.
Similar(59)
For this reason, we excluded 96,791 PCI admissions and 68,254 CABG admissions from the analysis.
Patients who were treated with antimicrobial drugs within 2 weeks before admission were excluded from analysis.
8725 patients with a length of stay (LOS) on the ICU <10 days and 111 patients that received dialysis in the first five days of ICU admission were excluded from analysis.
Children who lost significant weight during their stay in the rehydration unit, suggesting inadequate hydration in the face of ongoing diarrhea or an erroneous admission weight, were excluded from analysis, as their dehydration category could not be determined.
Out of a total of 64 charts, four were incomplete and three concerned planned postoperative ICU admissions and were therefore omitted from analysis.
For hospital admissions from ED visits, the analysis was significant for the 1 17 yrs age group (Table 2), with a 0.01-ppm increase in ozone being associated with a 4.5% increase in asthma-related ED admissions (95% CI = 0.6 8.5).
When we removed number of admissions from the adjusted model (analysis not shown), both higher HCC risk score and African American race had significant associations with increased non-VA use (OR = 1.28 [95% CI: 1.13, 1.44] and OR = 1.18 [95% CI: 1.05, 1.33], respectively).> -wrap-foot> HierarConditionalitional Category Risk Score.
For cardiovascular hospitalizations we used a weighted average RR = 1.0073 (95% CI 1.0047 1.0093) per 10 μg/m3 increase of PM10 based on the effect on cardiac and cerebrovascular admissions from a COMEAP meta-analysis [ 25].
Finally, we restrict the analysis to admissions from May to September.
A retrospective database analysis of admissions from January 2003 to June 2006.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com