MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113432672 · doi:10.1097/sap.0000000000002608

The Impact of Policy Reform on Utilization of Popular Reconstructive Procedures

2020· article· en· W3113432672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pooja Yesantharao, Waverley He, Pragna N. Shetty, Pathik Aravind, Amy Quan, Darya Fadavi, Oluseyi Aliu

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Plastic Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicaidMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Confidence intervalSpecialtyFamily medicineHealth careDemographyEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Medicaid beneficiaries systematically face challenges in accessing healthcare, especially with regard to specialty services like reconstructive surgery. This study evaluated the impact of 2 healthcare reform policies, Medicaid expansion and global hospital budgeting, on utilization of reconstructive surgery by Medicaid patients. METHODS: Utilization of reconstructive surgery by Medicaid patients in New Jersey (Medicaid expansion/no global budget), Maryland (Medicaid expansion/with global budgets), and Florida (no Medicaid expansion/no global budget) between 2012 and 2016 was compared using quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series modeling. Subgroup analyses by procedure type and urgency were also undertaken. RESULTS: During the study period, the likelihood of Medicaid patients using reconstructive surgery significantly increased in expansion states (Maryland: 0.3% [95% confidence interval = 0.17% to 0.42%] increase per quarter, P < 0.001; New Jersey: 0.4% [0.31% to 0.52%] increase per quarter, P = 0.004) when compared with Florida (nonexpansion state). Global budgeting did not significantly impact overall utilization of reconstructive procedures by Medicaid beneficiaries. Upon subgroup analyses, there was a greater increase in utilization of elective procedures than emergent procedures by Medicaid beneficiaries after Medicaid expansion (elective: 0.9% [0.8% to 1.3%] increase per quarter, P = 0.04; emergent/urgent: 0.2% [0.1% to 0.4%] increase per quarter, P = 0.02). In addition, Medicaid expansion had the greatest absolute effect on breast reconstruction (1.0% [95% confidence interval = 0.7% to 1.3%] increase per quarter) compared with other procedure types. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion increased access to reconstructive surgery for Medicaid beneficiaries, especially for elective procedures. Encouragingly, although cost-constrictive, global hospital budgeting did not limit longitudinal utilization of reconstructive surgery by Medicaid patients, who are traditionally at higher risk for complications/readmissions.

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)0.002
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 score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Plastic SurgerySame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207