Ten Years Experiences With Preoperative Evaluation Clinic for Day Admission Cardiac and Major Vascular Surgical Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Admission on the day of surgery for elective cardiac and noncardiac surgery is the prevalent practice in North America and Canada. This approach realizes medical, psychological and logistical benefits, and its success is predicated on an effective outpatient preoperative evaluation. The establishment of a highly functional preoperative clinic with a comprehensive set up and efficient logistical pathways is invaluable. This notion in recent years has included the entire perioperative period, and the concept of a perioperative anesthesia/surgical home (PASH) is gaining popularity. The anesthesiologists as perioperative physicians can organize and lead the entire process from the preoperative evaluation, through the hosptial discharge. The functions of the PASH include preoperative optimization of medical conditions and psychological preparation of the patients and their support system; the care in the operating room and intensive care unit; pain management; respiratory therapy; cardiac rehabilitation; and specialized nutrition. Along with oversight of the medical issues, the preoperative visit is an opportune time for counseling, clarification of expectations and discussion of research, as well as for utilization of various informatics systems to consolidate the pertinent information and distribute it to relevant health care providers. We review the scientific foundation and practical applications of a preoperative visit and share our experience with the development of the preoperative evaluation clinic, designed specifically for cardiac and major vascular patients scheduled for day admission surgery. The ultimate goal of preoperative evaluation clinic is to ensure a safe, efficient, and cost-effective perioperative care for patients undergoing a complex type of surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".