Electronic operative reports to support quality improvement and patient-centered care.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
95 Background: Operative reports (OP) for cancer surgery are usually narrated, although they provide inconsistent and incomplete information for patient care. National standards for cancer OP were unavailable until 2007. Over 10 years, surgeons in four Canadian provinces have transitioned from narrative to electronic synoptic reporting (ESP) for specific cancers. The electronic OP are now considered a patient medical record and integral to subsequent patient care. Surgeons are using electronic reports for quality assurance, billing, medical-legal conflict resolution and research. Methods: Disease-site expert panels were formed to bring together surgeons to discuss, identify, develop and form consensus on a core set of elements for breast, colorectal, ovary, endometrial, lung, prostate, and thyroid cancer surgeries and 64 quality indicators to set practice standards to consistently and comprehensively record pre-operative, operative procedures, intra-operative observations and pathology, clinical stage findings, complications and outcomes. These standards were implemented using ESP in four provinces and a mixed methods evaluation was carried out. Results: 245 surgeons in academic and community hospitals piloted and implemented pan-Canadian standards and generated 2000 synoptic reports and 729 discharge summaries over six months. In comparison to narrative reports, surgeons reported that the electronic synoptic reports: Capture complete and essential content (89% - 96%), 50% more; Contain 25 – 50 items vs. 2000 narrated words; Faster completion and turnaround time (5- 15 minutes) vs. 5 days; Rapid transmission to patient charts (91% in 1 hour and 97% within 24 hours) vs. 30 – 90 days; Result in cost savings $90/case; Enable performance measurement of surgical care to assess quality and outcome of surgery (e.g., residual disease and survival in patients) and length of aggressive vs. non-aggressive surgery and hospital stay (5.49 hours and 8.39 days vs. 3.06 hours and 6.83 days). Conclusions: Surgeons are building partnerships with key players to strategize best approaches to enable a system-wide adoption and implementation of synoptic operative reporting and quality of care measurement across Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".