MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887819118 · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.2101

Participation in Get With The Guidelines–Stroke and Its Association With Quality of Care for Stroke

2018· article· en· W2887819118 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Neurology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsStroke (engine)Association (psychology)MedicineQuality (philosophy)PsychologyMEDLINEPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPolitical sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) is an American Heart Association/American Stroke Association stroke-care quality-improvement program; however, to our knowledge, there has not been a direct comparison of the quality of care between patients hospitalized at participating hospitals and those at nonparticipating hospitals. Objective: To contrast quality of stroke care measures for patients admitted to hospitals participating and not participating in GWTG-Stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: Subpopulation of 546 participants with ischemic stroke occurring during a 9-year follow-up of the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study, a population-based cohort study of 30 239 randomly selected black and white participants 45 years and older recruited between 2003 and 2007. Of those with stroke, 207 (36%) were treated in a hospital participating in GWTG-Stroke and 339 in a nonparticipating hospital. Data were analyzed between July 29, 2017, and April 17, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality of care measures including use of tissue plasminogen activator, performance of swallowing evaluation, antithrombotic use in first 48 hours, lipid profile assessment, discharge receiving antithrombotic therapy, discharge receiving a statin, neurologist evaluation, providing weight loss and exercise counseling, education on stroke risk factors and warning signs, and assessment for rehabilitation. Results: Participants treated at participating hospitals had a mean (SD) age of 74 (8) years and 100 of 207 were men (48%), while those seen at nonparticipating hospitals had a mean (SD) age of 73 (9) years, and 161 of 339 were men (48%). Those seen in participating hospitals were more likely to receive 5 of 10 evidence-based interventions recommended for patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke, including receiving tissue plasminogen activator (RR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.65-8.50), education on risk factors (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.16-2.05), having an evaluation for swallowing (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.50), a lipid evaluation (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32), and an evaluation by a neurologist (RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20). Those seen in participating hospitals received a mean of 5.4 (95% CI, 5.2-5.6) interventions compared with 4.8 (95% CI, 4.6-5.0) in nonparticipating hospitals (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These data collected independently of the GWTG-Stroke program document improved stroke care for patients with ischemic stroke hospitalized at participating hospitals.

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)0.000
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.310 · 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