Improving Notification of Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Quality Improvement Project and Planned Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Inadequate follow-up of positive sexually transmitted infection (STI) test results is a gap in health care quality that contributes to the epidemic of STIs in adolescent women. The goal of this study was to improve our ability to contact adolescent women with positive STI test results after an emergency department visit. METHODS: We conducted an interventional quality improvement project at a pediatric emergency department. Phase 1 included plan-do-study-act cycles to test interventions such as provider education and system changes. Phase 2 was a planned experiment studying 2 interventions (study cell phone and patient activation card), using a 2 × 2 factorial design with 1 background variable and 2 replications. Outcomes were: (1) the proportion of women aged 14 to 21 years with STI testing whose confidential telephone number was documented in the electronic medical record; (2) the proportion of STI positive women successfully contacted within 7 days. RESULTS: Phase 1 interventions increased the proportion of records with a confidential number from 24% to 58% and the proportion contacted from 45% to 65%, and decreased loss to follow-up from 40% to 24%. In phase 2, the proportion contacted decreased after the electronic medical record system changed and recording of the confidential number decreased. Study interventions (patient activation card and study cell phone) had a synergistic effect on successful contact, especially when confidential numbers were less reliably documented. CONCLUSIONS: Feasible and sustainable interventions such as improved documentation of a confidential number worked synergistically to increase our ability to successfully contact adolescent women with their STI test results.
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 | 0.040 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".