MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997188476 · doi:10.1016/j.wjorl.2019.11.001

Determining the hospital cost of anterior epistaxis treatment modalities at a Canadian tertiary care centre

2019· article· en· W2997188476 on OpenAlexaffabout
Harrish Nithianandan, Kednapa Thavorn, Fatmahalzahra Banaz, Kristian I. Macdonald, Andrea Lasso, Shaun Kilty

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Anomalies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCanadian Council on International LawInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeEmergency departmentConfoundingEmergency medicineTertiary careCost analysisModalitiesTreatment modalitySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To estimate the hospital costs of managing anterior epistaxis in the Emergency Department at a Tertiary Care centre in Canada. Material and methods A cost analysis was conducted based on a retrospective review of Emergency Department visits from January 2012 to May 2014. A consecutive sample of adult patients with a diagnosis of anterior epistaxis was included. Anterior epistaxis was managed via one of: Nasal clip, Merocel®, Silver Nitrate cautery, Vaseline packing, other treatment or no treatment. Both the direct and indirect hospital costs ($CDN) for anterior epistaxis treatment were calculated from the hospital's perspective. Generalized linear models were used to assess the association between treatment modalities and total hospital costs while controlling for potential confounding factors. Results Three hundred and fifty‐three patients (49% female) with a mean age of (69.9 ± 18.5) years were included in the analysis. The median (interquartile ranges) costs of treatment ranged from C$227.83 (C$167.96, C$328.69) for observation to C$763.98 (C$632.25,C$830.23) for Merocel®. The overall median total hospital costs incurred across all modalities was C$566.24 (C$459.61, C$753.46) for the management of anterior epistaxis. Silver Nitrate, nasal clip, and observation were statistically associated with a lower cost when compared to Merocel® ( P < 0.001) even after potential confounding factors were controlled. Conclusions Our results show wide difference in the hospital cost of epistaxis across treatment modalities. These cost estimates can help inform future economic evaluation studies aiming to guide the allocation of health care resources for patients with epistaxis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
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.

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck SurgerySame topicVascular Anomalies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207