MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618813021 · doi:10.1097/bcr.0000000000000577

The Cost of Burn Transfers: A Retrospective Review of 7 Years of Admissions to a Regional Burn Center

2017· article· en· W2618813021 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan E Austin, Sofie Schlagintweit, Marc G. Jeschke, Russell D. MacDonald, Mahvareh Ahghari, Shahriar Shahrokhi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBurn centerTransfer (computing)Emergency medicineTotal costMedical recordMedical emergencyRetrospective cohort studySurgeryPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transport of thermally injured patients can involve significant costs; however, not all thermally injured patients necessitate transfer to a burn center. The purpose of this study was to review transfers to an American Burn Association-verified regional burn center to determine whether the transfers were necessary and the cost associated with unnecessary transfers. A retrospective chart review identified 707 patients transferred to an American Burn Association-verified burn center with an acute burn injury during a 7-year period. For the purposes of this study, "unnecessary transfer" was defined as any patient admitted fewer than 7 days who did not undergo operative intervention. Transfer cost estimates were based on records from regional land paramedic and land and air medical transport services. In total, 27.3% of transfers were potentially "unnecessary transfers," with an associated cost of approximately $227,396.93 (18.9% of total transfer costs in study). Average unnecessary transfer cost varied by method of transport: land ambulance (n = 130) $285.72, helicopter (n = 27) $4,136.34, and airplane (n = 15) $4,908.67. The transfer of thermally injured patients is associated with significant cost. Unnecessary transfers represent an inefficient use of a limited resource in an already strained healthcare system. The findings of this study suggest that further initiatives should be explored to ensure the appropriate transfer of thermally injured patients.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.343 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207