MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2276152109 · doi:10.1177/1357633x15595734

Speed and accuracy of mobile BlackBerry Messenger to transmit chest radiography images from a small community emergency department to a geographically remote referral center

2015· article· en· W2276152109 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Scheuermeyer, Brian Grunau, Jay Cheyne, Eric Grafstein, Jim Christenson, Kendall Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalKamloops Art GalleryUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJaeb Center for Health Research
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentReferralConfidence intervalMedical emergencyRadiographyEmergency medicineRadiologyFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Small emergency departments (EDs) may rely on radiologists at remote centers for interpretations of chest radiographs (CXRs). We investigated systematic transmission of CXR images from a small ED to a geographically remote referral center using the mobile BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) application. METHODS: Investigators obtained de-identified CXR images of consecutive ED patients via mobile phone camera. Each CXR image, along with a brief clinical history, was sent via BBM to an emergency physician located at a remote referral site, and the receiving physician replied via BBM to confirm reception. All communications, image generation, and image analysis was conducted on mobile phones. The primary outcome was the proportion of BBMs received within two minutes of sending; the secondary outcome was the proportion of BBM replies to the sending physician within five minutes. Image accuracy-comparing the radiologist's interpretation with the receiving emergency physician's interpretation-was estimated using predefined criteria. RESULTS: Of 1281 consecutive ED patients, 231 (18.0 %) had CXRs obtained, 320 CXRs were analyzed and 611 BBMs sent. All BBMs (100.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 99.4-00.0) arrived within two minutes; 595 BBMs (97.4%, 95% CI 95.8-98.4) were replied to within five minutes. Of the 58 CXRs with abnormalities requiring intervention, there were 55 concordances (overall agreement 94.2%, 95% CI 85.9-98.3; kappa 0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.0) CONCLUSION: Systematic transmission of CXR images from a small ED to a remote large center using mobile phones may be a safe and effective strategy to rapidly communicate important patient information.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207