MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Why are investigations not recommended by practice guidelines ordered at the periodic health examination?

2000· article· en· W1522901517 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicinePsychological interventionTest (biology)SpecialtyMultivariate analysisHealth careInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence-based guidelines recommend few routine investigations for healthy adults at the periodic health examination (PHE). However, small studies indicate that laboratory tests are commonly ordered at the PHE. This study examined PHE laboratory testing that is not recommended by recognized guidelines ('discretionary'). Using administrative data from the universal health care system in Ontario, Canada, we studied 792,844 adults having a PHE in 1996 and the 3,727 physicians who administered them. We measured the number of discretionary laboratory tests per PHE along with the patient and physician factors potentially influencing laboratory testing. A multilevel, multivariate model was used to examine the association between the number of discretionary laboratory tests at the PHE with patient and physician characteristics. A mean of 7.1 discretionary tests (SD 7.1) was ordered per PHE. Renal, haematological, glucose and lipid tests each were conducted in more than a third of PHEs. Testing varied extensively between physicians and was more common in healthy patients. With the exception of age, patient factors had little effect on discretionary testing. However, each physician factor we examined was independently associated with the number of discretionary tests. Physician specialty, practice volume and previous testing patterns had the strongest influence on discretionary testing. Discretionary investigations are common at the PHE. Testing varies extensively between physicians and seems to be driven more by physician than by patient factors. Interventions to modify discretionary test utilization at the PHE should consider these physician factors.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.135
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.140
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1350.140
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.250
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it