MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914057126 · doi:10.1161/str.50.suppl_1.wp124

Abstract WP124: Practice Variation in the Management of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage- A Survey of US and Canadian Emergency Medicine Physicians

2019· article· en· W2914057126 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aarti Kumar, Kian Niknam, Angela Lumba‐Brown, Joseph Bledsoe, Michael Woodruff, Michael A. Kohn, Jeffrey J. Perry, Prasanthi Govindarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentSubarachnoid hemorrhageEmergency medicineLumbar punctureComputed tomographyNeuroimagingRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: To rule out sub-arachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) national guidelines for emergency physicians recommends obtaining a non-contrast CT scan and, if negative, a lumbar puncture. However, anecdotal evidence suggests recent adoption of CT non-contrast alone in patients presenting within six hours from symptom onset and an increase in the use of a newer imaging modality, CT angiogram (CTA). Our aim was to examine emergency physicians’ diagnostic approach to SAH diagnosis and their adherence to the current guidelines. Method: We developed, validated, and distributed a survey to emergency physicians at three different emergency departments: Site 1) Stanford Healthcare, California, 2) Intermountain Healthcare, Utah, and 3) The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario. We surveyed emergency physicians with questions on test performance for SAH detection and case based scenarios to assess adherence to guidelines. Results were presented as proportions with 95% CIs. Results: Of the 216 physicians surveyed, we received 168 responses (77.8%). The responses by site were: 1) (n= 38, 23.2%), 2) (n=70, 42.7%), 3) (n=56, 34.1%). Most physicians indicated that non-contrast CT imaging within a 6-hour window detects >90% of SAH in those with a confirmed SAH [n=150 ( 89.3%, 95%CI 83.6 - 93.5)]. In response to the case based scenarios, a majority of the physicians indicated that they would use a non-contrast CT with an additional CTA [n=110 ( 65.5%, 95%CI 57.8- 72.6)], some indicated an additional LP [n=57 (33.9%, 95%CI 26.8 - 41.6)], and a few indicated both an additional CTA and LP[n=16 (9.5%, 95%CI 5.5-15.0)]. We also observed practice site variation in the proportion of physicians who indicated that they would use CTA: 1) (n=25/38, 65.8%), 2) (n= 54/70, 77.1%), and 3) (n=28/56, 50.0%) (p= 0.006). Conclusion: Survey responses indicated a significant variation in the emergency physicians’ use of diagnostic imaging for SAH and divergence from current guidelines. In our future studies, we will explore the reasons for the practice variation and increasing use of CTA as a diagnostic modality in SAH evaluation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207