MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7133021339

Developing a NITROglycerin Dose Titration Decision Support System (NITRO DSS)

2024· dissertation· W7133021339 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Navpreet Kamboj

Notice bibliographique

RevueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Langue
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueElectronic Health Records Systems
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesAmerican Heart Association
Mots-clésNitroglycerin (drug)Blood pressureClinical decision support systemDecision support systemAnginaClinical Practice
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background. Angina is one of the most common reasons people visit Canadian emergency departments, with approximately 800,000 annual visits. Nitroglycerin is a first-line medication for the acute relief of angina. There is no standardized dose of intravenous nitroglycerin because its impact on blood pressure varies significantly among patients. Trained critical and coronary care nurses manually increase or decrease the dose to achieve optimal titration, defined as obtaining the intended therapeutic effect (relief of angina) while avoiding side effects associated with nitroglycerin. Nurses use their clinical judgment and past experiences to inform their clinical decision-making about nitroglycerin dose titration. Many nurses have trouble selecting the right dose and anticipating the patient’s response to the dose adjustment, leading to suboptimal titration of nitroglycerin. Clinical decision support systems have been shown to support nurses’ titration-based decision-making for other medications in critical care. However, a system for nitroglycerin titration currently does not exist. A decision support system designed for the titration of nitroglycerin infusions would facilitate the prediction of blood pressure responses consequent to potential adjustments in dosage. This system, when integrated with the clinical judgment and experiential knowledge of nursing professionals, would enhance the precision and effectiveness of nitroglycerin titration. Objectives. To develop a Nitroglycerin Dose Titration Decision Support System (nitro DSS) that provides blood pressure predictions following a nitroglycerin dose change. Design. A multi-method design with quantitative and qualitative methods was used to develop the clinical decision support system for nitroglycerin dose titration. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare blood pressure measured using a continuous non-invasive and invasive arterial pressure device in adult patients admitted to a critical care setting (Study One). This was followed by a retrospective observational design study to predict the subsequent systolic blood pressure following dose titration (defined as any change in the dose of nitroglycerin) within a 30-minute window (Study Two). The accuracy of a linear model, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, ridge regression, and a stacked ensemble model trained using the Auto Gluon-Tabular framework were investigated. A persistence model, where the future value in a time series is predicted as equal to its preceding value, was used as the baseline comparison for model accuracy. The nitro DSS interface (visual display) was designed using a user-centred approach consisting of two phases (Study Three). The first phase was a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews to identify design specifications for the visual display of nitro DSS. The second phase was three iterative rounds of usability testing to test and refine the prototype. In each round of testing, participants completed two questionnaires: the System Usability Scale (to measure usability) and the Ottawa Acceptability of Decision Rules Instrument (to measure acceptability). Results. The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed substantial differences between blood pressure measurements obtained from continuous non-invasive and invasive monitoring devices. Given the critical differences, continuous non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring is not a reliable replacement for invasive monitoring in adult patients requiring critical care. As a result, continuous non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring is unsuitable for developing a clinical decision support system that aims to incorporate predictions of blood pressure. Therefore, available electronic health record data was used to train machine learning models to predict blood pressure responses to nitroglycerin titrations. The results of study two identified the stacked ensemble model developed using the AutoGluon-Tabular framework to have the lowest root-mean-square error of all models, producing a 22% improvement against the baseline (a persistence model). The results of phase one of the user-centered design revealed four themes for the interface design: (1) Clear and Consistent, (2) Vigilant, (3) Interoperable, and (4) Reliable. Nurses suggested the initial and subsequent prototype versions incorporate features reflecting the four identified themes. The findings from study one informed the development of an initial prototype, which underwent three iterative rounds of usability testing in phase two. Nurses tested the prototype and provided feedback to improve its usability and acceptability. All study participants' ratings on usability and acceptability exceeded the minimum threshold. Conclusion. This thesis successfully applied a multi-method design to develop nitro DSS, a clinical decision support system that predicts blood pressure responses to a potential nitroglycerin dose change. Upon completion of three rounds of usability testing, a refined nitro DSS prototype was identified which demonstrated excellent usability and acceptability as defined in the System Usability Scale and the Ottawa Acceptability of Decision Rules Instrument, respectively. Subsequent research includes developing a high-fidelity prototype, testing nitro DSS in silent trials, and conducting a randomized control trial.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,047

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,018
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,085
Tête enseignante GPT0,492
Écart entre enseignants0,408 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTSpace→Même sujetElectronic Health Records Systems→Travaux en français237 207→