Prehospital Management of Acute Stroke in Rural versus Urban Responders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stroke guideline compliance of rural Canadian prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) care in acute stroke is unknown. In this quality assurance study, we sought to compare rural and urban care by prehospital EMS evaluation/management indicators from patients assessed at an urban Canadian stroke center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred adult patients were randomly selected from the stroke registry. Patients were transported through Rural EMS bypass protocols or urban EMS protocols (both bypass and direct) to our stroke center between January and December 2013. Patients were excluded if they were first evaluated at any other health center. Prehospital care was assessed using ten indicators for EMS evaluation/management, as recommended by acute stroke guidelines. RESULTS: = 0.002). Unlike urban EMS, rural EMS did not routinely document scene time. CONCLUSION: Rural EMS responders' compliance to prehospital stroke evaluation/management was similar to urban EMS responders. Growth areas for both groups may be with prehospital stroke diagnostic tool utilization, whereas rural EMS responders may also improve with scene time documentation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".