MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053260411 · doi:10.1197/j.aem.2004.08.013

Supporting Clinical Practice at the Bedside Using Wireless Technology

2004· article· en· W2053260411 on OpenAlex
Michael J. Bullard, David P. Meurer, Ian Colman, Brian R. Holroyd, Brian H. Rowe

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHospital Admissions and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLikert scaleIntranetRandomized controlled trialEmergency departmentClinical PracticeMedical emergencyEmergency medicineFamily medicineNursingInternal medicineWorld Wide WebThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Despite studies that show improvements in both standards of care and outcomes with the judicious application of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), their clinical utilization remains low. This randomized controlled trial examined the use of a wirelessly networked mobile computer (MC) by physicians at the bedside with access to an emergency department information system, decision support tools (DSTs), and other software options. METHODS: Each of ten volunteer emergency physicians was randomized using a matched-pair design to work five shifts in standard fashion (desktop computer [DC] access) and five shifts with a wirelessly networked MC. Work pattern issues and electronic CPG/DST use were compared using end-of-shift satisfaction questionnaires and review of a CPG/DST database. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine between-shift differences. RESULTS: A total of 100 eight-hour shifts were evaluated; 99% compliance with postshift questionnaires was achieved. Using a seven-point Likert scale (MC values first), MCs were rated as being as fast (5.04 vs. 4.54; p=0.13) and convenient (5.08 vs. 4.14; p=0.07) as DCs. Overall, physicians rated MCs to be less efficient (3.18 vs. 4.30; p=0.02) but encouraged more frequent use of DSTs (4.10 vs. 3.47; p=0.03) without impacting doctor-patient communication (2.78 vs. 2.96; p=0.51). During the study period, physician use of an intranet Web application (eCPG) was more frequent during shifts assigned to the MC when compared with the DC (eCPG uses/shift, 3.6 vs. 2.0; p=0.033). CONCLUSIONS: The MC technology permitted physicians to access information at the bedside and increased the use of CPG/DST tools. According to physicians, patients appeared to accept their use of information technology to assist in decision making. Development of improved computer technology may address the major limitation of MC portability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.405 · 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