MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2319799388 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100014268

Wait Times for Carotid Endarterectomy, London Ontario 2006-2007

2013· article· en· W2319799388 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Erin Dyer, Stephen P. Lownie, Gary G. Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarotid endarterectomyStenosisStroke (engine)ReferralRetrospective cohort studyAuditSurgeryEmergency medicineGeneral surgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine time delays and identify factors that affect wait times from index neurological event to carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis treated at a regional neurosurgical referral centre. METHODS: We performed a retrospective audit over two years of all patients who underwent a carotid endarterectomy at University Hospital, London, Ontario. The number of days was calculated from first neurological event through until surgery. RESULTS: Eighty-nine carotid endarterectomies (CEAs) were performed by four surgeons during the years 2006 and 2007. From the first neurological event, the median wait time for surgery was 111 days, while from the last event the median wait time was 83 days. There was 19 days' wait between specialist / TIA clinic appointment and the receipt of neurosurgical referral. Median wait time for diagnostic imaging was eight days for carotid Doppler ultrasound and 15 days for CT or MR angiography. There was a 44 day wait from receipt of neurosurgical referral to the date of surgery. Only three patients (4%) received CEA within two weeks of their last neurological event. There was a trend towards a difference in wait times between inpatients and outpatients, but no difference between females compared with males, or between patients presenting with stroke versus TIA. DISCUSSION: Median wait times for CEA after first neurological event was over three months at our center, reflecting the diagnostic workup required in TIA as well as the lack of a systematic approach. This is the subject of continued study at our institution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→