MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415264279

Access to elective vascular surgery within the recommended time according to emergency referrals.

2001· article· en· W2415264279 on OpenAlexaff
Boris Sobolev, Peter Brown, David Zelt, S. E. D. Shortt

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElective surgeryConfidence intervalReferralCarotid endarterectomyOdds ratioProspective cohort studyVascular surgeryEmergency surgerySurgeryEmergency medicineAbdominal surgeryAbdominal aortic aneurysmConfoundingAneurysmInternal medicineCardiac surgeryCarotid arteries
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Referral pattern is a potential confounding factor when waiting-list performance is reported across hospitals or periods. A common concern is the ability to accurately estimate proportions of patients undergoing surgery in the recommended time without considering emergency caseload. In this study, the relation between emergency referrals and the rate of elective admissions to hospital within the recommended time was estimated. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: An acute care hospital in Kingston, Ont. PATIENTS: Between 1994 and 1999, 1,173 consecutive patients accepted for elective vascular surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of patients who underwent surgery within the recommended time, and time to surgery. STUDY VARIABLES: The weekly number of emergency cases, enrolment periods, urgency and type of surgery. RESULTS: Overall, the proportion of patients who underwent surgery within recommended time was 0.45, (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.48). Adjusted for enrolment period, urgency and type of surgery, the estimated proportion was 0.57, (95% CI, 0.49-0.64). Compared with surgery for peripheral vascular disease, the odds of the procedure being done within the recommended time were 34% lower for aortic abdominal aneurysm repair and 41% lower for carotid endarterectomy. After adjustment for the case-mix and access attributes, the rate of elective admission within recommended time was on average 30% lower for weeks in which there were 1 to 2 emergency cases (rate ratio [RR] = 0.70, [95% CI, 0.53- 0.93]), and 39% lower for weeks with 3 or more emergency cases (RR = 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.83]), relative to weeks with no emergency cases. CONCLUSIONS: When there is an increase in the number of emergency cases, a lower proportion of patients undergo elective surgery within the recommended time. Thus, when performance of surgical servces is evaluated, the probability of patients undergoing elective surgery on time should be adjusted relative to the number of emergency referrals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207