Time to Laryngoscopy for Hoarseness in Canada: Are the American Academy of Otolaryngology Guidelines Feasible?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To determine if a Canadian voice center is meeting the recommended time to laryngoscopy for hoarseness per the clinical practice guideline of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. Study Design Retrospective chart audit. Setting Tertiary referral Canadian voice center. Participants and Methods A total of 149 adult patients presenting with hoarseness over 6 months were included. Primary outcome measures were the time from onset of symptoms to laryngoscopy and the time from referral to laryngoscopy. Secondary outcome measures included patient‐ and disease‐modifying factors, diagnosis, and clinical management. Analysis was performed to determine what factors were associated with meeting the guideline. Results Patients were evaluated by the laryngologist after 21.9 ± 37.6 months (mean ± SD) of symptoms. One‐third (34.2%) of patients were seen within 3 months; 10.7% were seen within 4 weeks. Logistic regression showed that patients with neurologic symptoms (odds ratio, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.31‐12.43; P =. 015) and endotracheal intubation (odds ratio, 5.94; 95% CI, 2.21‐15.95; P <. 001) were associated with being seen within 3 months. Patients who had recent intubation (odds ratio, 6.04; 95% CI, 1.99‐18.34; P =. 002) were associated with being seen within 4 weeks. Conclusion It is an ongoing challenge for our Canadian voice center to meet the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery’s clinical practice guideline for recommended time to laryngoscopy. Patients with more severe pathologies were consistently triaged more urgently. It is debatable whether this 4‐week time recommendation is generalizable to a socialized health care system.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".