The Ophthalmic Surgical Backlog caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic: A population-based and microsimulation modelling study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Jurisdictions worldwide ramped down ophthalmic surgeries to mitigate the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), creating a global surgical backlog. We sought to predict the long-term impact of COVID-19 on ophthalmology surgical care delivery. Methods This is a population-based and a microsimulation modelling study. Provincial administrative data from January 2019 to May 2021 was used to estimate the backlog size and wait-times following the COVID-19 pandemic. For the post-pandemic recovery phase, we estimated the resources required to clear the backlog of patients accumulated on the waitlist during the pandemic. Results A total of 56,923 patients were on the waitlist in the province of Ontario awaiting non-emergency ophthalmic surgery as of March 15, 2020. The number of non-emergency surgeries performed in the province decreased by 45-98% from March to May 2020, and 48-80% from April to May 2021 compared to the same months in 2019. By 2 years and 3 years, the overall estimated number of patients awaiting surgery grew by 129% and 150%, respectively. The estimated mean wait-time for patients for all subspecialty surgeries increased to 282 (SD 91) in March 2023 compared to 94 days (SD 97) in 2019. The provincial monthly additional resources required to clear the backlog by March 2023 was estimated to be a 34% escalation from the pre-pandemic volumes (4,626 additional surgeries). Interpretation The magnitude of the ophthalmic surgical backlog from COVID-19 has important implications for the recovery phase. The estimates from this microsimulation modelling can be adapted to other jurisdictions to assist with recovery planning for vision saving surgeries.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".