MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747733201 · doi:10.1200/jop.2017.022228

Quality Improvement Initiatives to Optimize the Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Patients With Lung Cancer

2017· article· en· W2747733201 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geneviève C. Digby, Andrew Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCOPDMcNemar's testPulmonary function testingLung cancerPopulationBronchodilatorInternal medicineAsymptomaticPhysical therapyAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Patients with lung cancer (LC) frequently have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the optimization of which improves outcomes. A 2014 Queen’s University Hospitals audit demonstrated that COPD was underdiagnosed and undertreated in outpatients with LC. We sought to improve the diagnosis and management of COPD in this population. Methods: We implemented change using a Define/Measure/Analyze/Improve/Control (DMAIC) improvement cycle. Data were obtained by chart review from the Cancer Care Ontario database and e-Patient System for patients with newly diagnosed LC, including patient characteristics, pulmonary function test (PFT) data, and bronchodilator therapies. Improvement cycle 1 included engaging stakeholders and prioritizing COPD management by respirologists in the Lung Diagnostic Assessment Program. Improvement cycle 2 included physician restructuring and developing a standard work protocol. Data were analyzed monthly and presented on statistical process control P-charts, which assessed differences over time. The χ 2 and McNemar tests assessed for significance between independent and dependent groups, respectively. Results: A total of 477 patients were studied (165 patients at baseline, 166 patients in cycle 1, and 127 patients in cycle 2). There was no change in PFT completion over time, although respirology-managed patients were significantly more likely to undergo a PFT than patients who were not managed by respirology (56.7% v 96.1%; P < .00001). The proportion of respirology-managed patients with LC with airflow obstruction receiving inhaled bronchodilator significantly increased (baseline, 46.3%; cycle 1, 51.0%; and cycle 2, 74.3%). By cycle 2, patients with airflow obstruction were more likely to receive a long-acting bronchodilator if managed by respirology (74.3% v 44.8%; P = .0009). Conclusion: COPD is underdiagnosed and undertreated in outpatients with LC. A DMAIC quality improvement strategy emphasizing COPD treatment during LC evaluation in the Lung Diagnostic Assessment Program significantly improved COPD management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.378 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oncology PracticeSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207