MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996671303 · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181fca8c5

The Effect of Surgeon Volume on Outcomes and Resource Use for Vaginal Hysterectomy

2010· article· en· W1996671303 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Rogo-Gupta, Sharyn N. Lewin, Jin Hee Kim, William M. Burke, Xuming Sun, Thomas J. Herzog, Jason D. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeOdds ratioHysterectomyConfidence intervalIntensive care unitSurgeryIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of surgical volume on outcomes and resource use in women undergoing vaginal hysterectomy. METHODS: Women who underwent total vaginal hysterectomy and were registered in the Perspective database were examined. Perspective is a nationwide database developed to measure quality and resource use. Procedure-associated intraoperative, perioperative, and postoperative medical complications as well as hospital readmission, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) use, operating time, and cost were analyzed. Based on the overall gynecologic surgical volume and vaginal surgical volume of their surgeons, patients were stratified into tertiles. Complications were compared using adjusted generalized estimating equations and reported as odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: A total of 77,109 patients operated on by 6,195 gynecologic surgeons were identified. After adjustment for the effects of other demographic variables and concomitant procedures, patients operated on by high-volume vaginal surgeons were 31% (OR 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.80) less likely to experience an operative injury, whereas perioperative complications were reduced by 19% (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.72-0.92), medical complications decreased by 24% (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.67-0.86), ICU admission reduced by 46% (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.43-0.73), and the transfusion rate decreased by 28% (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61-0.85) in patients treated by high-volume vaginal surgeons, whereas rates of readmission were higher (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.04-1.47) in patients treated by high-volume surgeons. Operative times were lower in patients operated on by high-volume surgeons (P<.001). Although total gynecologic surgical volume had no effect on cost, patients treated by high-volume vaginal surgeons had lower costs (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Perioperative morbidity and resource use are lower in women undergoing vaginal hysterectomy when the procedure is performed by high-volume vaginal surgeons.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207