MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970405379 · doi:10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.017

Guideline Implementation Research: Exploring the Gap between Evidence and Practice in the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative

2007· article· en· W1970405379 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andra L. Blomkalns, M. T. Roe, Eric D. Peterson, E. Magnus Ohman, Elizabeth Fraulo, W. Brian Gibler

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineQuality managementUnstable anginaCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyMyocardial infarctionIntensive care medicineAcute coronary syndromeMedical emergencyEmergency medicineAnginaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translating research results into routine clinical practice remains difficult. Guidelines, such as the 2002 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, have been developed to provide a streamlined, evidence-based approach to patient care that is of high quality and is reproducible. The Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress ADverse Outcomes with Early Implementation (CRUSADE) Quality Improvement Initiative was developed as a registry for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes to track the use of guideline-based acute and discharge treatments for hospitalized patients, as well as outcomes associated with the use of these treatments. Care for more than 200,000 patients at more than 400 high-volume acute care hospitals in the United States was tracked in CRUSADE, with feedback provided to participating physicians and hospitals regarding their performance over time and compared with similar institutions. Such access to data has proved important in stimulating improvements in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes care at participating hospitals for delivery of acute and discharge guideline-based therapy, as well as improving outcomes for patients. Providing quality improvement methods such as protocol order sets, continuing education programs, and a CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative toolbox serve to actively stimulate physician providers and institutions to improve care. The CRUSADE Initiative has also proven to be a fertile source of research in translation of treatment guidelines into routine care, resulting in more than 52 published articles and 86 abstracts presented at major emergency medicine and cardiology meetings. The cycle for research of guideline implementation demonstrated by CRUSADE includes four major steps--observation, intervention, investigation, and publication--that serve as the basis for evaluating the impact of any evidence-based guideline on patient care. Due to the success of CRUSADE, the American College of Cardiology combined the CRUSADE Initiative with the National Registry for Myocardial Infarction ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction program to form the National Cardiovascular Data Registry-Acute Coronary Treatment & Intervention Outcomes Network Registry beginning in January 2007.

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 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)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.708
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.079 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations37
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Emergency MedicineSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207