Patient and Nurse-Related Implications of Remote Cardiac Telemetry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were (a) to determine the frequency of rhythm disturbance events among patients on remote cardiac telemetry, (b) to identify how many of these events were detected by the telemetry nurses, and (c) to explore the impact of managing telemetry on nurses' workload This prospective observational study took place in a nine-bed Coronary Respiratory Care Unit (CRCU) in a tertiary Canadian University Hospital. No lethal arrhythmias were detected during 420 hours of observation. There were a high number of remote telemetry warning arrhythmias, the vast majority of which were artifact (80.2%). A warning alarm occurred every 2.1 to 6.2 minutes. Nurses detected between 60% to 100% of valid warning alarms. Remote cardiac telemetry without a dedicated monitor-watcher places unnecessary demand on CRCU nurses' time because the vast majority of arrhythmia alarms are inconsequential. The addition of monitoring remote telemetry to the CRCU nurse's workload has the potential to negatively influence the care provided to CRCU patients.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it