MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Wait‐List Size at Registration Influence Time to Surgery? Analysis of a Population‐Based Cardiac Surgery Registry

2005· article· en· W2091462555 on OpenAlexaff
Boris Sobolev, Adrian R. Levy, Robert Hayden, Lisa Kuramoto

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalOddsComorbidityPopulationSurgeryLogistic regressionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the probability of undergoing coronary bypass surgery within a certain time was related to the number of patients on the wait list at registration for the operation in a publicly funded health system. METHODS: A prospective cohort study comparing waiting times among patients registered on wait lists at the hospitals delivering adult cardiac surgery. For each calendar week, the list size, the number of new registrations, and the number of direct admissions immediately after angiography characterized the demand for surgery. RESULTS: The length of delay in undergoing treatment was associated with list size at registration, with shorter times for shorter lists (log-rank test 1,198.3, p<.0001). When the list size at registration required clearance time over 1 week patients had 42 percent lower odds of undergoing surgery compared with lists with clearance time less than 1 week (odds ratio [OR] 0.58 percent, 95 percent, confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.63), after adjustment for age, sex, comorbidity, period, and hospital. The weekly number of new registrations exceeding weekly service capacity had an independent effect toward longer service delays when the list size at registration required clearance time less than 1 week (OR 0.56 percent, 95 percent CI 0.45-0.71), but not for longer lists. Every time the operation was performed for a patient requiring surgery without registration on wait lists, the odds of surgery for listed patients were reduced by 6 percent (OR 0.94, CI 0.93-0.95). CONCLUSION: For wait-listed patients, time to surgery depends on the list size at registration, the number of new registrations, as well as on the weekly number of patients who move immediately from angiography to coronary bypass surgery without being registered on a wait list. Hospital managers may use these findings to improve resource planning and to reduce uncertainty when providing advice on expected treatment delays.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations32
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Services ResearchSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207