Transport Refusal by Hypoglycemic Patients after On-scene Intravenous Dextrose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Administration of intravenous (IV) dextrose to hypoglycemic patients is delegated to advanced care paramedics in Ontario. Following a quality assurance review, which revealed that 47% of patients refused transport after receiving IV dextrose, the authors studied whether such patients seek additional medical care in the three days following the initial refusal. METHODS: Sequential ambulance call reports for on-scene treatments of hypoglycemia were examined, and a standardized telephone survey of the patients was conducted. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Data were collected from April 1999 to March 2000. RESULTS: One hundred patients were studied, with ages ranging from 20 to 92 years (mean 53.2 years). The average Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on presentation was 8.7 +/- 3.5. The average blood glucose level before administration of IV dextrose was 1.91 +/- 0.63 mmol/L. Sixty-eight percent of the patients refused transport. Significant differences between the transported group and the refusal group were age (transported 64.7 years, refused 47.8 years, p = 0.002) and initial blood glucose (transported 1.8, refused 2.1, p = 0.001). No difference was found in terms of repeat access to health care for related complaints. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups, with no difference in the overall satisfaction with paramedics' care (4.76 +/- 0.58 vs 4.75 +/- 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: The practice of treating patients for symptomatic hypoglycemia and leaving them at the scene appears to be safe. Further study is required to confirm this.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".