MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416582993 · doi:10.1111/jocn.13192

Factors affecting surgery decision‐making in patients with a chronic neurovascular condition

2016· article· en· W2416582993 on OpenAlexafffund
Bridget Klest, Christina Mutschler, Andreea Tamaian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersPsykologisk Institut, Aarhus UniversitetUniversity of Regina
KeywordsNeurovascular bundleMedicineClinical decision makingIntensive care medicineSurgeryGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore the factors that affect patient decision-making for an elective surgery. BACKGROUND: Cerebral cavernous malformations are lesions found in the brain and spinal cord comprised of abnormal blood vessels, which bleed sporadically causing serious neurological deficits. Course of treatment for cerebral cavernous malformation is often ultimately left up to the patient, and can include symptom management or surgery. Decision-making for surgery in life-threatening conditions has been well documented in the literature. Less extensive research has focused on elective surgeries, where patients have a choice. There has been no research on the factors that affect decision-making for cavernous malformation patients. DESIGN: Correlational self-report survey. METHODS: In part of a larger online study, participants were asked to rate the importance of six factors on their decision-making about surgery for cavernous malformation. RESULTS: Factors that were rated most important for individuals' decision-making included doctor's opinion regarding surgery, presence of disabling symptoms, fear of symptoms getting worse or developing new symptoms, and availability of an expert surgeon. Results indicated that these were rated as more important than having social support during recovery or having the means to pay for surgery. Additionally, having social support during recovery was rated as significantly more important than having the means to pay for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that affect decision-making for patients diagnosed with cavernous malformation were similar to those found with other medical conditions requiring elective surgery. This study will assist healthcare workers in understanding the decision-making process of individuals who may choose an elective surgery for potentially disabling conditions with uncertain outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Understanding the complex factors that affect decision-making in cavernous malformation will assist healthcare professionals to better communicate and support patients in their elective surgery decision-making.

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)0.002
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 score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207