Nephrology eConsults for Primary Care Providers: Original Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Champlain BASE™ (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) eConsult service allows primary care providers (PCPs) to submit patient-specific clinical questions to specialists via a secure web service. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the types of nephrology questions asked through an eConsult service based in eastern Ontario and assess the service's impact on the need for face-to-face consultations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using descriptive statistics was conducted using nephrology cases submitted between May 2011 and January 2015. Specialist response times and referral avoidance were collected. Validated taxonomies were used to categorize cases based on question type and content. SETTING: Patient cases were collected from PCPs in Ottawa, Ontario, and its surrounding communities and submitted to nephrologists at the Ottawa Hospital. PATIENTS: During the study period, 155 eConsults were submitted to nephrology. MEASUREMENT: Utilization and survey data were collected for all eConsults. Questions were categorized by subject matter and question type. RESULTS: A traditional consult visit was avoided in 45% of cases based on the specialist's advice; 21% cases required referral. Thirty-two percent of eConsults took specialists less than 10 minutes to complete, 55% took 10 to 15 minutes, 11% took 15 to 20 minutes, and only 2% took more than 20 minutes. Twenty-five percent of cases were related to proteinuria, 18% to chronic kidney disease (CKD), 17% to imaging, and 12% to drug use in CKD. Common question types included general management (37%), interpretation of laboratory test (17%), interpretation of an image report (13%), and need for nephrology referral (11%). LIMITATIONS: Some consults contained multiple categories and question types. Our analyses required a single classification, which may underestimate the number of questions in each category. Our study had a small sample size using cases completed in a single health jurisdiction, limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: The Champlain BASE™ eConsult service provided guidance to PCPs and reduced the number of face-to-face nephrology consultations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".