Notice bibliographique
Résumé
aiting an unnecessarily long time for surgery is obviously distressing, especially when one is suffering from a serious condition such as cancer.In this issue of CUAJ, Kawakami and colleagues 1 from Queen's University report their analysis of surgical wait times since 2003 in a group urology practice.The importance of their work lies in the real-time prospective and digitized booking system that collects various categories of information, thus making the data much more accurate and reliable as compared with several other studies in this field.The authors noticed an unfortunate steady rise in wait times over the last few years in both benign and cancer surgeries, with patients waiting a median of 56 days for cancer surgery in 2007.This, despite all the attention that wait times have received in Canada and especially in Ontario over the past several years.The authors correctly point out that government financial incentives do not always result in improved performance from a wait times perspective; other measures are often required.Furthermore, this study measures only the time between the moment that the decision was made to operate and the time of surgery.We know that before the decision to operate is made there are multiple other segments of time where patients may be waiting.We look forward to future reports from this group as their system and data set matures.In December 2005, the CUA sponsored an important consensus conference on surgical wait times in urological oncology, which resulted in a set of recommended limits on wait times for specific cancers. 2Now could be an opportune time to review the experience of Canadian urologists with respect to this indicator.Finally, just about every province now has a website listing wait times for various hospitals and surgical procedures.Health care authorities and politicians have made surgical wait times a major indicator of performance and are encouraging the public to seek services where they are faster.Although it is highly desirable to significantly reduce wait times, this approach is of concern.Wait times are but one of several indicators that patients should be aware of, the most important being quality of care.Waiting less time for surgery at another institution does not mean that the quality of the surgery will be the same.We must ensure that quality of care, albeit more difficult to measure, remains paramount.R Re ef fe er re en nc ce es s
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».