MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883301644

Abstract 337: Comparing Time to Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Rural States: Arriving via Ambulance vs Personally Owned Vehicle

2015· article· en· W2883301644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
JohnGallagher, JeffreySather, TomaszStys, MindyCook, PamMoe, GaryMyers, MichelleScharnott

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventional PCIPercutaneous coronary interventionMedicineMedical emergencyMyocardial infarctionEmergency medicineEmergency departmentIntervention (counseling)Quarter (Canadian coin)Cath labInternal medicineNursingGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota continue to build the infrastructure to improve the system of care for patients experiencing a ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Time from symptom onset to Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) is a critical component for better patient outcomes. First responders are critical to the success of an effective STEMI system of care. However, about 52% of STEMI patients in these states are arriving by self-transport or personally owned vehicles instead of activating the system via 911. Ideally, the catheterization lab team would be notified by EMS personnel in the field or by emergency physicians after receiving the transmitted ECG indicating a STEMI and reducing the time to PCI. Methods: In time period, 774 STEMI patients were entered into ACTION Registry-GWTG from Quarter 3 2013 to Quarter 2 2014. The data included STEMI patients from 19 hospitals in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota participating in Mission: Lifeline, an American Heart ...

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207