Pre-operative patient preparation in the prevention of surgical site infections.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: In 1999 the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care granted funding to St. Mary's General Hospital for a Regional Cardiac Care Center. In July 2003 the cardiac surgery program opened. During the program-planning phase, protocols and procedures related to patient preparation for cardiac surgery were developed. OBJECTIVE: To share policies, protocols and patient teaching tools developed from research driven, evidenced based standards of practice. To complete a one-year review (January to December 2004) and assess the compliance rates with pre-operative patient preparation procedures on all Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) cardiac surgery patients. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: 191 bed community-based Regional Cardiac Care Centre. PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery from January 1st 2004 to December 31st 2004. ANALYSIS: Compliance rate following patient education related to pre-operative washes, assessing completion of pre-operative washes, and location of clipping relative to the Cardiovascular Operating Room (CVOR). CONCLUSION: A team of Registered Nurses was able to effectively implement policies and protocols within a cardiac surgery program that meet the recommended standards of care of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Operating Room Nurses Association of Canada (ORNAC) and Safer Health Care Now! Initiative. A retrospective chart review has demonstrated that staff consistently apply and document care in accordance with the developed pre-operative wash and hair clipping protocols.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".