New Cardiac Surgery Programs Established From 1993 To 2004 Led To Little Increased Access, Substantial Duplication Of Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite decreasing demand for bypass surgery, 301 new cardiac surgery programs opened between 1993 and 2004. We used Medicare data to identify where the new programs opened and to assess their impact on access and efficiency. Forty-two percent of the new programs opened in communities that already had access to cardiac surgery, which suggests that their creation has led to a fight for shares of a shrinking market. New programs were much more likely to open in states that did not require them to show a certificate-of-need. Overall, travel time to the nearest cardiac surgery program changed little, which suggests that these programs have done little to improve geographic access. The duplication of services that resulted in many areas may have engendered competition based on quality, price, or both, but it may also have increased surgical rates, with unknown results. We observe that certificate-of-need requirements may help avoid unnecessary duplication of services by preventing new programs from opening in close proximity to existing ones.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".