The hospital costs associated with acute paediatric burn injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ongoing rationing of healthcare threatens services that are well established, and cripples others that desperately require investment. Burn, for one, remains a neglected epidemic in South Africa (SA), despite the magnitude of the problem. OBJECTIVE: To identify the prominent components contributing to the cost of hospital admission with paediatric burn injury. Determining the true costs of specialist services is important, so that resources can be allocated appropriately to achieve the greatest possible impact. METHODS: A retrospective study was undertaken over 1 year to determine patient demographics and injury details of 987 patients admitted with burn injuries to Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Cape Town, SA. The in-hospital financial records of 80 randomly selected patients were examined. This was followed by a prospective study to determine the financial implications of four cost drivers, i.e. bed cost per day, costs of medications received, costs of dressings for wound care, and costs of surgical intervention. A random selection of 37 dressing changes (in 31 paediatric patients) and 19 surgical interventions was observed, during which all costs were recorded. RESULTS: As expected, severe flame burns are responsible for more prolonged hospital stays and usually require surgical intervention. Scald burns comprise the greatest proportion of burn injuries, and therefore account for a considerable part of the hospital's expenditure towards burn care. CONCLUSION: While community programmes aiming to prevent burn injuries are important, this study motivates for the implementation of accessible ambulatory services in low-income areas. This strategy would enable the burn unit to reduce its costs by limiting unnecessary admissions, and prioritising its resources for those with more severe burn injuries.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".