MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P5224Improving the Appropriate Use of Transthoracic Echocardiography- The results of the Echo WISELY trial

2017· article· en· W2794687541 on OpenAlexaff
R. Sacha Bhatia, Michael E. Farkouh, Noah Ivers, Xinxin Yin, Dorothy Myers, Gillian C. Nesbitt, K. Yared, Jeremy Edwards, Thomas Folkmann Hansen, Brian M. Wong, Amer M. Johri, Jacob A. Udell, Adina Weinerman, H.R. Rakowski, Rory B. Weiner

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreThe Scarborough HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMount Sinai HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity Health NetworkQueen's UniversityWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEcho (communications protocol)CardiologyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) have defined rarely appropriate (rA) as transthoracic echocardiograms (TTEs) for which there is a clear lack of benefit. Single center studies have shown AUC–based educational initiatives reduce rA TTEs, however, it remains unknown whether such initiatives are effective in improving TTE ordering across multiple clinical settings. This study sought to investigate the impact of an AUC–based educational intervention on outpatient TTE ordering in an international multi-centered study of cardiologists and primary care providers. Methods: We conducted a prospective, investigator blinded, multi-centered, randomized controlled trial of an AUC-based educational intervention aimed to reduce rA outpatient TTEs. The study was conducted at eight hospitals across two countries. We randomized cardiologists and primary care providers to receive either intervention (educational online lecture on AUC, access to the American Society of Echocardiography Echo AUC App on appropriateness, and monthly individualized physician feedback on ordering behavior via email) or control (no intervention). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of rA TTEs.

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→