MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patient-centered wait time measurement in Ontario.

2012· article· en· W2590792234 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leonard Kaizer, Monika K. Krzyzanowska, Sherrie Hertz, John R. Srigley, Julian Dobranowski, Jonathan C. Irish, Padraig Warde, Julia Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerReferralColorectal cancerCohortStage (stratigraphy)CancerInternal medicineChemotherapyLung cancerOncologySurgeryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

233 Background: Since 2005, a concerted effort to measure and manage access to chemotherapy services in Ontario has resulted in a significant reduction in several specific wait time intervals (referral for medical oncology consultation and medical oncology consultation to first treatment). To identify other opportunities to improve access, a comprehensive analysis of the all-inclusive wait times from cancer diagnosis to the start of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with early stage colon, breast, and lung cancer (patient centered wait time) has been undertaken. Methods: The study cohort comprised all Ontario patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy in 2009 for early stage colon, breast, and lung cancers. The Ontario Cancer Registry, linked to several administrative healthcare databases in Ontario, was used to identify the cohort and variables of interest. Wait time from diagnosis of cancer to the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy was measured and separated into segments based on the dates of diagnosis (D), surgery (S), referral to medical oncology (R), medical oncology consultation (C), and first adjuvant chemotherapy treatment (T), and each was analyzed for variation at a regional and institutional level. The times from surgery to pathology sign-out (TTPR) and for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) acquisition were also studied in a subset of cases. Results: In 2009, 86% of patients with stage III colon cancer, 80% of patients with stage I to III breast cancer and 63% of patients with stage II lung cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy started their treatment within 120 days of diagnosis. There was significantly better performance and less regional variation for colon cancer patients (82-93%) than for breast cancer patients (63-90%). For the whole cohort of breast cancer patients, the median total time from diagnosis to adjuvant chemotherapy was 81 days with the following segmental breakdown D-S (30 days), S-R (19 days), R-C (16 days), and C-T (16 days). The mean TTPR for colon cancer patients was 11.6 days and PICC insertion was < 7 days in 92% of patients. Conclusions: A number of opportunities for process improvement were identified, including shortening the pathology reporting interval and the timing for initiating referral to a medical oncologist.

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)0.001
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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.583
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.018 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207