The economic impact of increased length of stay associated with surgical site infections in liver transplantation on Canadian healthcare costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complications after liver transplantation cause additional healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to contrast the length of stay (LOS) costs for recipients with and without surgical site infections (SSIs). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at a transplant center in Canada, between February 2011 and August 2014. The difference in the LOS costs was assessed by the Mann-Whitney U test, while multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify the variables that may have impacted on the costs. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-nine liver transplant recipients were enrolled. Thirty-six recipients developed SSIs (36/229, 15.7%). The median LOS costs in recipients with and without SSIs were $39,456 Canadian dollars (interquartile range $25,696- 59,722) and $31,084 Canadian dollars (interquartile range $22,712-49 610), respectively (p = .072). There was a trend that the costs were higher for those recipients with versus those without SSIs (p = .088). Transfusion of ≥ 5 units of red cells and dialysis before transplantation impacted on cost. CONCLUSION: There was a trend for higher healthcare facility costs for recipients with SSIs. Red cell transfusions and greater dialysis use before transplant were factors associated with the cost. Implementation of cost reduction strategies targeting high-cost recipients is necessary.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".