1204 RESOURCE UTILIZATION OF POLYSOMNOGRAPHY AT THE ALBERTA CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gold standard for the diagnosis of sleep related breathing disorder (SRBD) is polysomnography (PSG). PSG testing is expensive and often inaccessible. The waiting time to have a PSG completed at the Alberta Children’s Hospital (ACH) is greater than 1 year. The aim of this quality improvement project is to assess our current practice and identify areas for reduction of PSG wait-times. A retrospective chart review of PSG completed at the ACH from April 2015 to May 2016 was completed. Data were collected to measure: the total number of PSG completed, source of PSG requisition, average time to PSG completion, indication for PSG, new versus repeat PSG, age ranges of patients for whom PSG was completed, Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) for new studies, and recommendations by the interpreting sleep physician. A total of 518 polysomnography studies were completed over the time period evaluated. Just under half of completed polysomnograms (44%) were repeat studies. Of the polysomnograms completed for the first time, sleep physicians requested the greatest number (56%) followed by otolaryngologists (18%) and sleep neurologist (10%). Polysomnography are a scarce resource. Re-evaluating processes is important to ensure appropriate utilization of this resource. A closer assessment of the indications and findings of repeat PSG studies may help to shorten our wait-times. More data is actively being collected to further clarify the implications of this finding. None.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".