MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How to integrate vital interdisciplinary information in a non-closed-loop system?

2012· article· en· W2586724517 on OpenAlexaff
Jack T Seki, Dominic Tsang, Diana Incekol, Ian Brandle, Emma Paisley, Roy Lee, Marina Kaufman, Monika K. Krzyzanowska, Vishal Kukreti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacy and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationMedicineVital signsWorkaroundDiscontinuationMedical emergencyMedical recordSurgeryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

314 Background: History of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) must be readily accessible to ensure patient safety while receiving chemotherapy. While documentation of HSR is a routine process, gaps are found in maintaining vital information amongst various stand-alone systems (SAS). Centralized documentation (CD) by frontline nursing staff in the Electronic Patient Record is key to reduce risk. Pharmacists refer to CD for HSR information when processing chemotherapy. We developed and evaluated a technology-based workaround approach as a possible solution to a non-closed-loop system. Methods: An e-clinical point of care documentation tool was designed and built for nursing data collection of HSR details within the Electronic Patient Record. Vital parameters necessary for “complete” HSR documentation were outlined in a cue card, including time of reaction, reaction drug, volume and rate of infusion, management, vital signs and objective symptoms, re-challenge or discontinuation, and patient outcome. This cue card standardizes e-documentation. Pre- and post-system rollout survey was used to gauge effectiveness of CD by nursing and pharmacists. Results: Over a 6-month period, there were 173 HSRs in 11,754 patient visits (1.5%), with variability in collection of vital documentation in relation to roll out of the e-tool. In the pre-CD rollout phase (May 25 to September 12, 2011) 108 HSRs were identified that were documented in multiple locations including an electronic prescribing SAS (86%) and the chemotherapy nursing paper record (77%). In the post-CD phase (April 23 to June 23, 2012) 65 HSRs were identified, 46% of which were documented in CD, 72% in the electronic prescribing SAS, and 85% in paper record. Six of 7 pharmacists (85%) and 7 of 10 nurses (70%) who were surveyed indicated that the new CD documentation process was “effective” or “significantly effective”. Conclusions: As non-fully integrated systems exist in current environments, technology workarounds should be used to “close the loop”. E-Clinical documentation is an upcoming centralized technology solution, which we have used with promising initial adoption results. Formal e-documentation tools can lead to more detailed documentation than current processes.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.313 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPharmacy and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207