What Does Cleft Lip and Palate Care Cost? The Time and Economic-Associated Burden of Care From Birth to Maturity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: This study aims to describe the burden of care (BoC) for the management of patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) by identifying provider burden, characterizing an interaction burden, and calculating an economic burden associated with their health system interactions. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients with nonsyndromic CLP treated at a pediatric tertiary hospital between January 1, 1999, and April 30, 2021. Healthcare utilization data for inpatient and outpatient interactions were extracted. Community outpatient data were obtained from affiliated specialists. Bottom-up microcosting was utilized for hospital costing, the provincial tariff guide for provider reimbursement, and zip code for calculating patient costs. Results: In total, 58 patients identified with CLP had a median of 148.5 healthcare interactions (consults/follow-ups/surgeries) between the ages of 0 and 18 years. Patients had a median of 10.5 surgical procedures, and a median 135.8 outpatient interactions. The most used specialty service was orthodontics, with a median of 71.5 orthodontic interactions per patient. The median cost of care, including direct hospital costs, physician costs, community healthcare costs, and indirect costs, was $73,398. Conclusions: Patients born with nonsyndromic CLP have a very high frequency of healthcare encounters, out of proportion to cost associated with healthcare, suggesting an overall significant BoC.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it