Understanding the impact of a clinical care pathway for major head and neck cancer resection on postdischarge healthcare utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to explore the association of a postoperative clinical care pathway for patients undergoing major head and neck surgery with microvascular reconstruction on postdischarge health care utilization and cost and to compares a nonpathway group (n = 60) to a prospective, pathway-managed group (n = 54). Our primary purpose was to understand whether pathway-managed patients used postdischarge health care resources differently than patients managed without a care pathway. METHODS: Health care utilization data (counts and costs) were collected for the 3 months after discharge. Differences in utilization were compared using Poisson regression. The null hypothesis was that there were no differences in utilization between the pathway and nonpathway groups. RESULTS: Pathway patients had fewer postdischarge encounters in 2 of 4 sectors. Readmission costs were significantly less in the pathway group only. CONCLUSION: A postoperative inpatient clinical care pathway in patients with head and neck cancer is associated with decreased health care utilization and inpatient costs in the 3 months after discharge. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E1216-E1220, 2016.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".