MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604449159 · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocx029

Using electronic medical record notes to measure ICU telemedicine utilization

2017· article· en· W2604449159 on OpenAlexaff
Amy M. J. O’Shea, Mary Vaughan‐Sarrazin, Boulos Nassar, Peter Cram, Lynelle R. Johnson, Robert S. Bonello, Ralph J. Panos, Heather Schacht Reisinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute on AgingOffice of Research and DevelopmentHealth Services Research and DevelopmentU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsTelemedicineMedicineIntensive care unitMedical emergencyMEDLINEHealth careIntensive careHealth recordsMedical recordEmergency medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the complexity of high-acuity health care, designing an effective clinical note template can be beneficial to both document patient care and clarify how telemedicine is used. We characterized documented interactions via a standardized note template between bedside intensive care unit (ICU) providers and teleintensivists in 2 Veterans Health Administration ICU telemedicine support centers. All ICUs linked to support centers and providing care from October 2012 through September 2014 were considered. Interactions were assessed based on initiation site, bedside initiator, contact type, and patient care change. Of 14 511 ICU admissions with teleintensivist access, teleintensivist interaction was documented in 21.6% (N = 3136). In particular, contacts were primarily initiated by bedside staff (74.4%), use increased over time, and of contacts resulting in changes in patient care, most were initiated by a bedside nurse (84.3%). Given this variation, future research necessitates inclusion of utilization in evaluation of Tele-ICU and patient outcomes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.030
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Medical Informatics AssociationSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207