Costs and Resource Use Among Child Patients Receiving Silver Nitrate/Fluoride Varnish Caries Arrest.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of silver nitrate/fluoride varnish (SN/FV) on care costs. METHODS: A retrospective matched cohort study, using Oregon Medicaid claims (January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014) for patients younger than 21 years old, compared patients treated with SN/FV to matched patients not treated with SN/FV. The number of services and costs were compared using student's t test and generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression models. RESULTS: Patients treated with SN/FV (n equals 4,612) and matched patients treated conventionally (n equals 13,498) averaged 28±7 (SD) months of continuous eligibility based on initial treatment date. The number of first-year services and total services over an average of 28 months were higher for patients treated with SN/FV (10.6 versus 6.7 in year one; 19.3 versus 8.8 overall; P<0.0001). Excluding diagnostic/preventive services, costs were higher in patients treated conventionally than patients treated with SN/FV in the first year. Overall costs were similar ($698 versus $707; P=.52). The average number of services was 58 percent higher (95 percent confidence interval [CI] 1.54 to 1.63) for patients treated with SN/FV, but costs remained similar. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with silver nitrate/fluoride varnish accrued a greater number of services and higher total costs over approximately 28 months but lower treatment costs than patients treated conventionally.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".