Does Pediatric Surgical Specialty Training Affect Outcome After Ramstedt Pyloromyotomy? A Population-Based Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Ramstedt pyloromyotomy is a common operation in infants and is often done by general surgeons. We wished to determine whether there are any differences in outcome when this procedure is done by subspecialist pediatric general surgeons as compared with general surgeons. METHODS: All Ramstedt pyloromyotomies in the province of Ontario between 1993 and 2000 were reviewed. Children with complex medical conditions or prematurity were excluded. Cases done by general surgeons were compared with those done by pediatric surgeons, specifically examining hospital stay and complications. RESULTS: Of 1777 eligible infants, 67.9% were operated on by pediatric surgeons and 32.1% by general surgeons. Total and postoperative lengths of stay were longer in the general surgeon group compared with the pediatric surgeons (4.31 vs 3.50 days for length of stay; 2.95 vs 2.25 days for postoperative length of stay). The general surgeons had a higher overall complication rate (4.18% vs 2.58%). The incidence of duodenal perforation among general surgeons was almost 4 times that of pediatric surgeons (relative risk: 3.65; 95% confidence interval: 1.43-9.32). Of the 4 infants who required repeat surgery because of an incomplete pyloromyotomy, all were originally operated on by a general surgeon. Analysis of the effect of surgeon volume on outcomes suggested that higher volume resulted in better outcome in both groups. CONCLUSION: Subspecialist pediatric general surgeons achieve superior outcomes for children who undergo Ramstedt pyloromyotomy.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it