MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902563858 · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05103

Use Of Telemedicine For ED Physician Coverage In Critical Access Hospitals Increased After CMS Policy Clarification

2018· article· en· W2902563858 on OpenAlexaff
Marcia M. Ward, Kimberly A. S. Merchant, Knute D. Carter, Xi Zhu, Fred Ullrich, Amy Wittrock, Amanda Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Affairs · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingTelemedicineBackupMedicaidMedical emergencyMedicineEconomic shortageBusinessNursingFamily medicineHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a chronic shortage of physicians to cover emergency departments (EDs) in critical access hospitals. A 2013 memorandum from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services clarified that a telemedicine physician could fulfill the regulatory requirements for physician backup when advanced practice providers were at telemedicine-equipped critical access hospital EDs but local physicians were not. In a sample of nineteen hospitals, coverage schedules in 2016 showed that seven had begun the use of tele-ED physician backup for advanced practice providers, decreasing local physician coverage in their EDs. These seven hospitals tended to have decreasing ED staffing costs, while the hospitals not applying this policy showed continually increasing staffing costs over time. Telemedicine also provided other benefits, such as improved physician recruitment and retention. In the future, more critical access hospitals will likely use telemedicine to provide physician backup for advanced practice providers staffing the ED.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth AffairsSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207