MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108690868 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.051

Impact of Caseload on Total Hospital Charges: A Direct Comparison Between Minimally Invasive and Open Radical Prostatectomy—A Population Based Study

2011· article· en· W2108690868 on OpenAlexaff
Firas Abdollah, Lars Budäus, Maxine Sun, Monica Morgan, Rupinder Johal, Rodolphe Thuret, Kevin C. Zorn, Hendrik Isbarn, Alexander Haese, Claudio Jeldres, Paul Perrotte, Francesco Montorsi, Markus Graefen, Pierre I. Karakiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatectomyUrologyPopulationProstate cancerInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We tested the relationship between caseload and total hospital charges after stratifying by minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 1,188 vs 3,354 men treated with minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy in the Florida Hospital Inpatients data file in 2008. Caseload was defined as the count of procedures performed by each surgeon between the study start on January 1, 2008 and the date of each procedure. Patients were divided into tertiles based on their procedure specific caseload. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to address the relation between caseload and total hospital charges for the minimally invasive and open procedures. Covariates were patient age, race, comorbidity, and length of stay. RESULTS: Median total hospital charges for minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy were $33,234 and $33,674, respectively (p=0.03). Median total hospital charges in the low, intermediate and high minimally invasive vs open procedure caseload tertiles were $41,765, $34,799 and $28,780 vs $35,642, $34,726 and $32,726, respectively. On multivariate analysis with the high minimally invasive caseload tertile as the reference category the increments of the probability of charges in excess of the 2008 median of $33,588 were 3.9 and 8.1-fold for the intermediate and low caseload minimally invasive procedures, and 2.5, 3.6 and 2.8-fold for the high, intermediate and low caseload open procedures, respectively (each p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall median total hospital charges are virtually the same for minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy. However, total hospital charges for the minimally invasive procedure have a more sensitive caseload effect, as evidenced by the wider distribution of the median of minimally invasive caseload specific total hospital charges vs that of open radical prostatectomy. The high caseload minimally invasive procedure resulted in the lowest total hospital charges relative to all other minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy categories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207