Clinical relevance of access targets for elective dental treatment under general anesthesia in pediatrics.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical relevance of access targets for elective dental procedures performed under general anesthesia at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Ontario, by assessing incremental changes in the burden of dental disease over wait times for such procedures. METHODS: Children scheduled for elective dental procedures under general anesthesia were assigned a priority according to the dental diagnosis and the medical risk status. Each priority level was defined by a specific diagnostic code and access target (maximum acceptable wait time). The dental records of children who underwent dental procedures with general anesthesia between June 2005 and December 2008 were assessed retrospectively. A novel assessment scale was used to measure the cumulative burden of dental disease during the waiting period. RESULTS: A total of 378 children (age range 10 months to 17 years) met the inclusion criteria. Statistically significant correlations were identified between disease burden and wait times for priority group IV (access target 90 days) (p=0.004), for the entire sample (p<0.001), for children with advanced dental caries and low medical risk (p=0.005), for patients with comorbidities (p=0.036), for healthy patients (p<0.001), for females (p=0.014) and for males (p=0.008). The mean cumulative burden of disease over time did not differ between matched groups with and without comorbidity (p=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: A trend suggestive of increasing burden of dental disease for children with longer wait times for elective dental procedures involving general anesthesia was found, but it was not clinically significant. Refinements in the assessment scale and a better understanding of the natural history of dental disease will likely be useful in developing clinically relevant access targets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".