MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1817783832

Effects of a computerized cardiac teletriage decision support system on nurse performance: results of a controlled human factors experiment using a mid-fidelity prototype.

2007· article· en· W1817783832 on OpenAlexaff
Kirsten Carroll Somoza, Kathryn Momtahan, Gitte Lindgaard

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision support systemBridge (graph theory)Quality (philosophy)Interface (matter)Computer scienceFidelityProcess (computing)NursingHuman–computer interactionMedicinePsychologyProcess managementArtificial intelligenceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A gap exists in cardiac care between known best practices and the actual level of care administered. To help bridge this gap, a proof of concept interface for a PDA-based decision support system (DSS) was designed for cardiac care nurses engaged in teletriage. This interface was developed through a user-centered design process. Quality of assessment, quality of recommendations, and number of questions asked were measured. Cardiac floor nurses' assessment quality performance, but not their recommendation quality performance, improved with the DSS. Nurses asked more questions with the DSS than without it, and these additional questions were predominantly classifiable as essential or beneficial to a good assessment. The average participant satisfaction score with the DSS was above neutral.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207