Changes in the incidence and surgical treatment of ankyloglossia in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent reports show increases in rates of ankyloglossia and frenotomy in British Columbia. We carried out a study to determine temporal trends and regional variations in ankyloglossia and frenotomy in Canada. METHODS: The study included all hospital-based live births in Canada (excluding Quebec) between April 2002 and March 2015, with information obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Information on ankyloglossia and frenotomy was obtained from records of hospital admission for childbirth. Temporal trends and provincial/territorial variations were quantified using rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Ankyloglossia rates increased from 6.86 in 2002 to 22.6 per 1000 live births in 2014 (P for trend < 0.001), while frenotomy rates increased from 3.76 in 2002 to 14.7 per 1000 live births in 2014 (P for trend < 0.001). Frenotomy rates among infants with ankyloglossia increased from 54.7% in 2002 to 63.9% in 2014 (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.13-1.24). Compared with British Columbia, rates of ankyloglossia were over three-fold higher in Saskatchewan (RR: 3.40, 95% CI: 3.16-3.67), Alberta (RR: 3.50, 95% CI: 3.29-3.72) and the Yukon (RR: 3.62, 95% CI: 2.67-4.92), while rates of frenotomy were three- to four-fold higher in the Yukon (RR: 3.41, 95% CI: 2.28-5.10), Alberta (RR: 4.01, 95% CI: 3.71-4.33) and Saskatchewan (RR: 4.12, 95% CI: 3.76-4.52). CONCLUSION: A desire to increase rates of breast feeding initiation and absence of standardized criteria for the diagnosis of ankyloglossia have resulted in runaway rates of frenotomy for newborn infants in some parts of Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".