Anaesthesia, surgery, obstetrics, and emergency care in Guyana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The surgical and anaesthesia needs of low-income countries are mostly unknown due to the lack of data on surgical infrastructure and human resources. The goal of this study is to assess the surgical and anaesthesia capacity in Guyana. A survey tool adapted from the WHO Tool for Situational Analysis to Assess Emergency and Essential Surgical Care was used to survey nine regional and district hospitals within the Ministry of Health system in Guyana. In nine hospitals across Guyana, there were an average of 0.7 obstetricians/gynaecologists, 3.5 non-OB surgeons, and 1 anaesthesiologist per hospital. District and regional hospitals performed an annual total of 1520 and 10,340 surgical cases, respectively. All but 2 district hospitals reported the ability to perform surgery. An average hospital has two operating rooms; 6 out of 9 hospitals reported routine medication shortages, and 4 out of 9 hospitals reported routine water or electricity shortages. Amongst the three regional hospitals, 16.1% of pregnancies resulted in Caesarean section. Surgical capacity varies by hospital type, with district hospitals having the least surgical capacity and surgical volume. District level hospitals routinely do not perform surgery due to lack of basic infrastructure and human resources.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".