MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104192469 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(15)00004-2

Global access to surgical care: moving forward

2015· letter· en· W2104192469 on OpenAlexaffabout
Evan G. Wong, Dan Deckelbaum, Tarek Razek

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Global Health · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMEDLINEGlobal healthMedicineComputer scienceIntensive care medicineData scienceNursingPolitical sciencePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global surgical care is gaining ground on the public health platform. Throughout 2015–16, the World Bank is publishing the long-anticipated third edition of its Disease Control Priorities (DCP3). First published in 1993,1Jamison DT Mosley WH Measham AR Bobadilla JL Disease control priorities in developing countries. Oxford University Press, New York1993Google Scholar these reports aim to systematically identify effective interventions to address the disease burden in low-income and middle-income countries. For the first time since its inception, the DCP now includes a distinct volume on the value of surgical care. Volume 1—Essential Surgery2Debas HT Donkor P Gawande A Jamison DT Kruk ME Mock CN Disease control priorities, 3rd edn: vol 1. Essential surgery. World Bank, Washington, DC2015Google Scholar—focuses on the benefits of surgical care, including its potential to substantially decrease mortality while being exceptionally cost-effective; the issues of access to life-saving surgery, perioperative safety, and the inclusion of surgery in universal health coverage are also specifically addressed. The recognition of surgery as an essential component of global public health stems from a growing body of academic literature detailing the disparities in access to surgical care. Population-based surveys have been instrumental in quantifying the unmet need for surgical care, and hospital-based studies have shed light on deficiencies in human and material resources required for basic surgical care. Global estimates of surgical care and need, arising from complex statistical models, have also been essential in quantifying the problem and have been especially effective in gaining the attention of stakeholders and decision-makers from outside the surgical sphere. In 2008, Weiser and colleagues3Weiser TG Regenbogen SE Thompson KD et al.An estimation of the global volume of surgery: a modelling strategy based on available data.Lancet. 2008; 372: 139-144Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1699) Google Scholar estimated that, of the 234 million surgical procedures done annually worldwide, only 3·5% occurred in countries with health expenditures of US$100 or less per capita. Funk and colleagues4Funk LM Weiser TG Berry WR et al.Global operating theatre distribution and pulse oximetry supply: an estimation from reported data.Lancet. 2010; 376: 1055-1061Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (261) Google Scholar estimated that more than 2 billion people worldwide lack access to adequate surgical care. In The Lancet Global Health, Blake Alkire and colleagues5Alkire BC Raykar NP Shrime MG et al.Global access to surgical care: a modelling study.Lancet Glob Health. 2015; 3: e316-e323Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (348) Google Scholar now provide additional measures to help us gain political priority on the public health agendas. In this study, Alkire and colleagues modelled access to surgery in 180 countries on the basis of four criteria: timeliness, surgical capacity, safety, and affordability. Based on their probability models, 4·8 billion people, or 68% of the world's population, lack access to adequate surgical care. This proportion varied greatly according to income classification, with 99·5% of the population in low-income countries—as opposed to 13·9% in high-income countries—with inadequate access. Besides providing further evidence that deficiencies in access to surgical care remain a major public health concern, this study's methods and findings shed light on important steps forward in improving access to surgery worldwide. Complex statistical models that provide global estimates rely on primary data collection; in other words, estimates from models are only as reliable as their inputs. To move things forward, we must continue to quantify the problem at the grassroots level; measurements of the prevalence of surgical diseases, the availability of resources required for surgical care, and the outcomes of surgical procedures will remain essential components of future studies. However, now that increasing attention is being paid to surgery in public health, we must also capitalise on this opportunity to move beyond descriptive studies. Charles Mock recently issued a call for the academic global surgery community to take major steps forward in the literature.6Mock C Surgical capacity surveys: a call for papers on the next steps for moving beyond descriptive data.World J Surg. 2015; 39: 811-812Crossref PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar Now that a robust body of literature has detailed the need, the time has come to delineate root causes, design effective interventions, and measure processes and outcomes over time. The breakdown of access to surgical care into timeliness, capacity, safety, and affordability could be particularly useful in guiding these future studies. The climate is ripe for major advances in improving access to surgical care worldwide. Surgical trainees are increasingly interested in global health.7Powell AC Casey K Liewehr DJ Hayanga A James TA Cherr GS Results of a national survey of surgical resident interest in international experience, electives, and volunteerism.J Am Coll Surg. 2009; 208: 304-312Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (143) Google Scholar The resolution entitled “Strengthening emergency and essential surgical care and anaesthesia as a component of universal health coverage” has been unanimously adopted by the World Health Organization's Executive Board.8GIEESCStrengthening emergency and essential surgical care and anaesthesia as a component of universal health coverage. World Health Organization, Geneva2014Google Scholar The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery has gained momentum and will hopefully provide a unified voice for the community.9Meara JG Leather AJM Hagander L et al.Global Surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development.Lancet. 2015; (published online April 27.)http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60160-XGoogle Scholar We must capitalise on these opportunities to finally provide the “neglected stepchild”10Farmer PE Kim JY Surgery and global health: a view from beyond the OR.World J Surg. 2008; 32: 533-536Crossref PubMed Scopus (469) Google Scholar with the attention it deserves. The Centre for Global Surgery is supported by the Grand Challenges Canada Grant (Fall 2014). We declare no competing interests. Global access to surgical care: a modelling studyMost of the world's population does not have access to surgical care, and access is inequitably distributed. The near absence of access in many low-income and middle-income countries represents a crisis, and as the global health community continues to support the advancement of universal health coverage, increasing access to surgical services will play a central role in ensuring health care for all. Full-Text PDF Open Access

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Global HealthSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207