Congenital tracheoesophageal fistula and coordination of care: Expectations and realities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) is a rare congenital anomaly with chronic morbidities. Aside from health care costs, the authors suspected that additional burden rests on the family due to hospitalizations, radiological and surgical procedures, and frequent outpatient visits. It was speculated that this complex care is poorly coordinated. The objective of the present study was to document utilization and coordination of health care services for children with TEF at the Alberta Children's Hospital (Calgary, Alberta). METHODS: Medical records of children with TEF (primary surgical repair at Alberta Children's Hospital between April 1994 and September 1999) were reviewed for demographics, TEF type, associated anomalies, age at diagnosis and repair, health services utilization data, and radiological and surgical procedures. RESULTS: Twenty-two children were identified, of whom 18 survived beyond one year. Ten of these 18 children were male. Average gestational age and birth weight were 37.4 weeks (range 32 to 42 weeks) and 2512 g (range 780 g to 3950 g), respectively. Seventy-eight per cent of children had at least one associated anomaly. Median initial hospital and intensive care unit stays were 27.5 days and 12 days, respectively. During year 1 of life, there was a median of 31 radiological examinations, five surgical procedures, 2.5 hospital admissions and five outpatient clinic visits. Coordination of procedures and outpatient visits was poor. In year 2 of life, children had fewer procedures, admissions and outpatient visits; between years 2 and 5, procedures or admissions were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Children with TEF endure multiple procedures and lengthy hospital admissions in early life. There was easy access to, but minimal coordination of, subspecialist care, procedures and admissions. A dedicated multidisciplinary clinic for children with TEF should improve care.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".