MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061051956 · doi:10.1080/10903120600725892

Performance Analysis of a Medical Decision Algorithm to Mitigate Spread of SARS Due to Interfacility Patient Transfers

2006· article· en· W2061051956 on OpenAlexaffabout
Russell D. MacDonald, Bonnie Henry, Rebecca Stuart

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalAuthorizationMedical recordSuspectEmergency medicineAlgorithmMedical emergencyInternal medicineComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine performance of a medical decision algorithm to mitigate spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) from interfacility patient transfers during the Toronto SARS outbreak. METHODS: Records from the Provincial Transfer Authorization Centre and Toronto Public Health from April 1 to July 31, 2003, were linked using probabilistic methods. Authorization decision (transfer authorized or denied) and SARS status (probable case, suspect case, or patient under investigation for SARS; or non-SARS case) were obtained for linked records. Primary outcome was the number of patients where correct authorization decisions were made based on SARS status at the time of request. Secondary outcome was the number for whom, in retrospect, authorization decision was correct knowing final SARS status. Algorithm sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined. RESULTS: There were 14,571 requests for transfer and 2,132 patients investigated for SARS during the study period. The algorithm authorized 14,551 and did not authorize 20 requests. Sensitivity and specificity to make appropriate authorization decisions at the time of request were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 77.2%-100%) and 99.95% (95% CI, 99.9-100%), respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 65% (95% CI, 44.1%-85.9%) and 100% (95% CI, 98.4%-100%), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity, in retrospect, within ten days of the transfer request were 100% (95% CI, 80.6%-100%) and 99.97% (95% CI, 99.9%-100%), respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 80% (95% CI, 62.5%-97.5%) and 100% (95% CI, 98.4%-100%), respectively. Seven of the 20 patients with nonauthorized requests were not known to have SARS at the time of request. Within ten days, three of seven were under investigation for, a suspect case of, or a probable case of SARS. CONCLUSIONS: The medical decision algorithm was highly sensitive and specific in correctly authorizing transfers. Despite its highly sensitive and specific algorithm, it did incorrectly deny authorization to a very small number of patients without SARS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrehospital Emergency CareSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207