MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of Rapid Care Process Implementation on Reperfusion Times Across Multiple ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction Networks

2017· article· en· W2577406456 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher B. Fordyce, Hussein R. Al‐Khalidi, James G. Jollis, Mayme L. Roettig, Joan Gu, Akshay Bagai, Peter B. Berger, Claire C. Corbett, Harold L. Dauerman, J. Lee Garvey, Timothy D. Henry, Ivan C. Rokos, Matthew W. Sherwood, B. Hadley Wilson, Christopher B. Granger

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Interventions · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersMedicureAbbott VascularAbiomedDuke Clinical Research InstituteMedicines CompanyBoston Scientific CorporationNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteGilead SciencesDaiichi Sankyo EuropeSanofiAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionEmergency departmentEmergency medicineEmergency medical servicesInternal medicineCardiologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator program, implemented in 16 US metropolitan regions, resulted in more patients receiving timely reperfusion. We assessed whether implementing key care processes was associated with system performance improvement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hospitals (n=167 with 23 498 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients) were surveyed before (March 2012) and after (July 2014) program intervention. Data were merged with patient-level clinical data over the same period. For reperfusion, hospitals were grouped by whether a specific process of care was implemented, preexisting, or never implemented. Uptake of 4 key care processes increased after intervention: prehospital catheterization laboratory activation (62%-91%; P<0.001), single call transfer protocol from an outside facility (45%-70%; P<0.001), and emergency department bypass for emergency medical services direct presenters (48%-59%; P=0.002) and transfers (56%-79%; P=0.001). There were significant differences in median first medical contact-to-device times among groups implementing prehospital activation (88 minutes implementers versus 89 minutes preexisting versus 98 minutes nonimplementers; P<0.001 for comparisons). Similarly, patients treated at hospitals implementing single call transfer protocols had shorter median first medical contact-to-device times (112 versus 128 versus 152 minutes; P<0.001). Emergency department bypass was also associated with shorter median first medical contact-to-device times for emergency medical services direct presenters (84 versus 88 versus 94 minutes; P<0.001) and transfers (123 versus 127 versus 167 minutes; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Accelerator program increased uptake of key care processes, which were associated with improved system performance. These findings support efforts to implement regional ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction networks focused on prehospital catheterization laboratory activation, single call transfer protocols, and emergency department bypass.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207