MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182207945 · doi:10.1111/anae.13307

Specialist pre‐operative assessment clinics

2015· review· en· W2182207945 on OpenAlex
Jugdeep Dhesi, M. Swart

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

VenueAnaesthesia · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePaternalismScope (computer science)RehabilitationPreferenceMedical assessmentQuality (philosophy)NursingPopulationClinical decision makingMedical emergencyFamily medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While specialist pre-operative assessment is not new, its focus has evolved in response to more operations and changes in the surgical population. Patients are older and have more long-term medical comorbidities. At the same time, there has been a move from paternalistic medical decision-making to shared decision-making, based on an individual patient's choice or preference. Specialist pre-operative consultations have had to adapt to these changes by broadening their scope. Pre-operative clinics have a central role in shared decision-making, coordinating and planning care before, during and after surgery, including rehabilitation and discharge planning. Multiple specialties need to work together to deliver quality patient-centred care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.369 · 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