The Cost of Treating Caries-Related Complaints at a Children's Hospital Emergency Department.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the number and diagnoses of caries-related complaints presenting at Canada's largest children's hospital emergency department (ED) and the costs associated with treatment over 5 years. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective review of the health records of all children who presented to The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, with caries-related emergency complaints from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2012. A caries-related complaint was defined as a chief complaint of pain or swelling resulting from the sequelae of dental decay (reversible pulpitis, irreversible pulpitis, abscess or cellulitis), as recorded in the chart by the treating physician or dentist. Visit information included chief complaint, final diagnosis, treatment rendered and patient disposition at discharge. Decision Support Services, a hospital department that analyzes resource use and associated costs, calculated the institutional costs for the episodes of emergency care. RESULTS: There were 1081 visits over the 5-year period, with a 19% increase in visits over that time. The most common presenting complaint was pain (50.8%) and the most common diagnosis abscess (35.6%). A dentist was consulted for 60.0% of the children and dental treatment in the ED was provided for 25.9%. The mean cost of treatment per patient was Can$575.17 (95% confidence interval $501.91-$648.43). CONCLUSIONS: Over the 5-year study period, dental visits to this tertiary care pediatric hospital increased. The most common complaint was pain, and the diagnosis for about a third of these cases was abscess. Dental consultation was often included in the management of these patients and the resultant cost of these visits was about Can$600/patient.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".