MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789775435 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.003

A3 COLORECTAL CANCER DEATHS WHILE AWAITING GASTROENTEROLOGY CONSULTATION AT A CANADIAN ACADEMIC CENTRE

2018· article· en· W2789775435 on OpenAlexaffabout
Douglas Motomura, Tasha Kulai, Shelley Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralTriageFamily medicineCause of deathDemographicsGeneral surgeryEmergency medicineInternal medicineDiseaseDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delays in access to gastrointestinal (GI) services have long been a concern of practicing gastroenterologists. Triage criteria used at the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre (QEII HSC) in Halifax, Nova Scotia, are based on 2006 Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus recommendations. The demand for GI services at our academic centre has exceeded available resources and only urgent referrals are being seen within recommended timeframes. Non-urgent referrals are not being seen. Achieving nationally recommended targets for wait times remains a challenge and this raises concern for potential patient morbidity and mortality while awaiting assessment. To our knowledge, no previous studies have documented details surrounding death while awaiting GI consultation. (1) Outline patient demographics and circumstances of death while awaiting GI consultation at the QEII HSC, (2) describe referrals received on these patients and (3) determine whether cause of death was related to reason for referral. The Practice Affairs Committee at the QEII HSC is notified when a patient has died while on the GI waitlist. Basic demographic and referral information were collected on each case in addition to details surrounding the cause of death. Two gastroenterologists who are blinded to data collection reviewed original referrals and determined if the referral was triaged appropriately and whether cause of death is related, possibly related or unrelated to reason for referral. In case of disagreement between two physicians in the review process, a third independent physician provided opinion. From March 2015 to September 2017, 39 deaths occurred on the GI waitlist. Mean age was 70.3 years. The majority of referrals (61.5%) came from family physicians and most (92.3%) were felt to be appropriately triaged. The average interval time from referral to death was 348 days (range 4 - 1050 days). In each triage category, patients waited significantly longer than guideline-proposed wait times. Of the 38 known causes of death, seven (18.4%) cases were directly related to referral diagnosis, while three (7.9%) cases were deemed possibly related. The most common cause of related death was colorectal cancer (n=6, 85.7%), and the most common reason for referral for these patients was anemia (n=4, 57.1%). Inappropriate triaging occurred in one of the seven related cases due to systems error. Significant patient mortality on GI waitlist is due to the primary GI reason for referral. As wait times for GI consultations remain well above national recommendations, this review highlights the need for additional resource allocation towards addressing the growing problem of GI wait times in Nova Scotia. Figure 1. Time from referral to death. C2- Semi Urgent Consult. C3 - Non-Urgent Consult. C3S- Colon Cancer Screening. E2 - Semi Urgent Endoscopy. E3 - Non-Urgent Endoscopy. Figure 2. Deaths related to original reason for referral None

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.165
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207