MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2620522366 · doi:10.14288/1.0347427

Structure, process and outcomes in emergency general surgery

2017· article· en· W2620522366 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristin DeGirolamo

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)MedicineMedical emergencyComputer scienceIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Dedicated emergency general surgery (EGS) services have been established across North America as a means to bring focus and quality to a large, complex and vulnerable surgical population. The emergence of these services represents a great opportunity to understand and improve emergency surgical care. Methods: This research programs applies a health systems structure/process/outcomes framework to the study of EGS services in Canada: 1. OUTCOME: A systematic review of the effects of an EGS service on patient and non-patient related outcomes 2. STRUCTURE: A national cross sectional study of structure and case mix on 14 EGS services 3. PROCESS: Detailed process mapping of a complex EGS condition Results: 1. OUTCOMES: Studies found increased daytime and decreased after-hours operating, improved patient transit from ED to OR to home, and decreased length of stay after implementation of an EGS service. The overall trend was higher more diverse case volumes, which improved resident education. Lower complication rates were noticed in the appendicitis and cholecystitis groups. 2. STRUCTURE: Canadian EGS services demonstrated variability in service organization and access to operating rooms. However, a national cross sectional study of EGS patients revealed that all services see diverse case mix and high complexity, and routinely make complex judgments about operative and non-operative care. 3. PROCESS: The processes of care for small bowel obstruction (SBO) patients from the time of presentation to the time of follow-up were highly elaborate and variable in terms of duration. Data visualization strategies were used to identify substantial variability in terms of time to CT scan and time to OR. Conclusions: The EGS model has been implemented worldwide, and has demonstrated an improvement in timeliness of care, decreased administrative costs, and improved trainee learning. EGS services are well-established in Canada, and poised to identify new opportunities for improved patient care. Process mapping has been successfully integrated into surgical specialties and provides insight into potential areas of performance improvement in EGS.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes→French-language works237,207→