MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415019639 · doi:10.1055/s-2007-970353

Telemedizin in der akuten Schlaganfallversorgung

2007· review· de· W2415019639 on OpenAlexaff
Heinrich J. Audebert, R Haberl, Werner Hacke, René Handschu, Johannes Schenkel, M. Scibor, A. Schleyer, M. Siebler, Bijan Vatankhah, A Wiborg, Bernhard Widder

Bibliographic record

VenueDMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · 2007
Typereview
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseaseMedical emergencyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telemedicine is increasingly being utilised for the remote evaluation of stroke patients, particularly in neurologically underserved areas. It is usually based on video examination and teleradiological evaluations of brain scans. Scientific analyses have demonstrated the reliability of neurological scores assessed via videoconference. Teleradiology using electronically transmitted original imaging data is potentially equivalent to onsite assessment. Intravenous thrombolysis can be indicated with similar results as in experienced stroke centres if both technological and professional quality standards are applied. However, improved clinical outcomes of stroke patients have only been shown when telemedicine was combined with the Stroke Unit concept based on specialised stroke wards and organised stroke care. More scientific evaluation is needed in the fields of cost effectiveness, quality management and implementation of further technological innovations. There are still insufficient data about the use of telemedicine in prevention, rehabilitation and post-stroke care and a comprehensive scientific evaluation is still needed.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.021

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 head0.349
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.175 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDMW - Deutsche Medizinische WochenschriftSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207