Socioeconomic Status and Wait Times for Pediatric Surgery in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Even in a publicly funded health care system, access to care may be related to socioeconomic status (SES). For children, delays in surgical procedures can have profound functional, social, and psychological effects with lifelong impact. The purpose of this study was to determine whether SES was related to meeting surgical wait time access targets for children. We also assessed the effects of gender, age, and distance to hospital on meeting access targets. METHODS: Patient addresses, referral wait times, and surgical wait times were obtained for 39,287 surgical procedures between 2005 and 2011 at the Hospital for Sick Children. Using census data, we derived household income quintile, distance to hospital, and indices of social and material deprivation. These indices were correlated with the percentage of children meeting clinic referral wait time targets and receiving surgery within the Pediatric Canadian Access Targets for Surgery. RESULTS: Across all SES quintiles, 33% of children exceeded their referral wait time targets, and 28% of children exceeded their surgical wait time targets. Indices of material or social deprivation and age did not correlate with the time from referral to clinic consultation (P = .54, .40, and .58, respectively). Gender was statistically significant (P < .001), but the difference was small (odds ratio = 0.87 for girls). Distance was also statistically significant (P = .005), and these differences translate into clinically meaningful differences in meeting wait time targets. Regarding completion of surgical procedures, material deprivation, distance, and gender did not correlate with longer wait times for surgery (P = .44, .09, .59, respectively). Social deprivation was statistically significant (P = .02) but not clinically significant. Increasing patient age was significantly associated with increased proportion of out-of-window wait times (P < .001). SES did not affect the timeliness of completion of surgery even when the urgency of the surgery (priority level based on diagnosis) was considered. CONCLUSIONS: SES does not predict the timeliness of delivery for pediatric surgical services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".