MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767111695 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.161529

Improving Access to Rheumatologists: Use and Benefits of an Electronic Consultation Service

2017· article· en· W2767111695 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHealthcare Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaOttawa HospitalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatologyReferralPolyarthritisPhysical therapyInternal medicineArthritisFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use and benefits of an innovative eConsult service to improve access to rheumatologists. METHODS: There were 225 eConsults directed to rheumatology that were categorized by type of question and effect on face-to-face referral rates. RESULTS: The median response time by the rheumatologists was 1.9 days. Clinical questions included drug treatment (34%), diagnosis (26%), or management (14%). Osteoporosis was the most common diagnosis (22%), followed by pain in multiple joints (11%), and polyarthritis (10%). A face-to-face referral was avoided in 38% of cases. CONCLUSION: There are clinical questions that can be answered quickly by an eConsult, improving access to rheumatologists.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.251 · 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