Cost Losses Associated With the “PICC, Stick, and Run Team” Concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Covenant Healthcare System is a 500-bed facility in Saginaw, Michigan. A peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) program was instituted there in 1990 when it was St. Lukes Hospital. Over the course of 17 years, 30 nurses had been trained to place PICCs in their spare time. A “PICC, stick, and run team” was established in 1998 but was unsuccessful. After a merger with Saginaw General Hospital, Covenant Healthcare created two full-time vascular access specialty positions. This nursing-based PICC program with full-time staffing has revitalized vascular access at Covenant Healthcare System. Currently, PICCs are placed proactively at the beginning of hospital stays. Peripheral catheter restarts have been replaced with reliable PICC access sites. Delayed discharge for PICC insertion is no longer an issue. Covenant Healthcare System is a 500-bed facility in Saginaw, Michigan. A peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) program was instituted there in 1990 when it was St. Lukes Hospital. Over the course of 17 years, 30 nurses had been trained to place PICCs in their spare time. A “PICC, stick, and run team” was established in 1998 but was unsuccessful. After a merger with Saginaw General Hospital, Convenant Healthcare created two full-time vascular access specialty positions. This nursing-based PICC program with full-time staffing has revitalized vascular access at Covenant Healthcare System. Currently, PICCs are placed proactively at the beginning of hospital stays. Peripheral catheter restarts have been replaced with reliable access sites. Delayed discharge for PICC insertion is no longer an issue.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".