Productivity costs decrease after endoscopic sinus surgery for refractory chronic rhinosinusitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The primary objective of this pilot study was to define the change in productivity costs following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Secondary objectives were to identify CRS-related characteristics that may influence the degree of productivity improvement after ESS. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, multi-institutional, observational cohort study. METHODS: The human capital approach was used to define productivity costs. Annual absenteeism, presenteeism, and lost leisure time were quantified to define annual lost productive time (LPT). LPT was monetized using the annual daily wage rates obtained from the 2012 US Census and the 2013 US Department of Labor statistics. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with refractory CRS who underwent ESS were followed for a mean of 15 months (range, 8-25 months). Following ESS, there were improvements in annual absenteeism (22 days reduced to 3 days), annual presenteeism (41 days reduced to 19 days), and annual household days lost (12 days reduced to 6 days). Overall, the preoperative productivity costs were reduced after ESS ($9,190 vs. $3,373, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Daily productivity is negatively impacted by the presence of CRS. The outcomes from this study provide the first insights into the reduced productivity costs associated with receiving ESS for refractory CRS. Future studies with larger sample sizes will need to validate the results from this pilot study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c Laryngoscope, 126:570-574, 2016.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".