Epidemiology and Healthcare Expenditure for Skin Disease in Emergency Departments in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the epidemiology and costs associated with managing dermatologic conditions in emergency departments (EDs). OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence and mean cost per case of skin diseases in EDs in Alberta. METHODS: Alberta Health Services' Interactive Health Data Application was used to determine the epidemiology and costs associated with nonneoplastic dermatologic diseases in EDs in the province of Alberta, Canada, from 2018 to 2022. Skin conditions were identified using the International Classification of Disease 10th edition diagnostic groupings. RESULTS: Skin disease represented 3.59% of all ED presentations in Alberta in 2022. The total costs associated with managing dermatologic conditions have remained stable over time at approximately 15 million Canadian Dollars (CAD) annually, but the mean cost per case has risen from 188.88 (SD 15.42) in 2018 to 246.25 CAD (SD 27.47) in 2022 (7.59%/year). Infections of skin and subcutaneous tissue were the most expensive diagnostic grouping. The most common dermatologic diagnostic groupings presenting to the ED were infections of skin and subcutaneous tissue [mean age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) of 143.67 per 100,000 standard population (SD 241.99)], urticaria and erythema [mean ASIR 33.57 per 100,000 standard population (SD 59.13)], and dermatitis and eczema [mean ASIR 18.59 per 100,000 standard population (SD 23.65)]. Cellulitis was both the most common and the costliest individual diagnosis. The majority of patients were triaged as less urgent or nonurgent. CONCLUSIONS: Skin disease represents a substantial public health burden in EDs. Further research into drivers of cost change and areas for cost savings is essential.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".