MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920656493 · doi:10.1136/openhrt-2018-000975

Reducing delay in patients with acute coronary syndrome and other time-critical conditions: a systematic review to identify the behaviour change techniques associated with effective interventions

2019· review· en· W2920656493 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Farquharson, Purva Abhyankar, Karen Smith, Stephan U Dombrowski, Shaun Treweek, Nadine Dougall, Brian Williams, Marie Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Heart · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersChief Scientist Office
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionCritical appraisalPsycINFORandomized controlled trialMEDLINEPhysical therapyMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryCohort studyAcute coronary syndromeAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Time to treatment in many conditions, particularly acute coronary syndrome, is critical to reducing mortality. Delay between onset of symptoms and treatment remains a worldwide problem. Reducing patient delay has been particularly challenging. Embedding behaviour change techniques (BCTs) within interventions might lead to shorter delay. Objective: To identify which BCTs are associated with reductions in patient delay among people with symptoms or conditions where time to treatment is critical. Methods: The data sources were Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. Study eligibility criteria include intervention evaluations (randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and cohort studies) involving adults (aged >18 years) and including an outcome measure of patient delay up to August 2016. Study appraisal and synthesis methods include screening potential studies using a transparent, replicable process. Study characteristics, outcomes and BCTs were extracted from eligible studies. Results: From 39 studies (200 538 participants), just over half (n=20) reported a significant reduction in delay. 19 BCTs were identified, plus 5 additional techniques, with a mean of 2 (SD=2.3) BCTs and 2 (SD=0.7) per intervention. No clear pattern between BCTs and effectiveness was found. In studies examining patient delay specifically, three of four studies that included two or more BCTs, in addition to the two most commonly used additional techniques, reported a significant reduction in delay. Conclusions: Around half of the interventions to reduce prehospital delay with time-critical symptoms report a significant reduction in delay time. It is not clear what differentiates effective from non-effective interventions, although in relation to patient delay particularly additional use of BCTs might be helpful. Trial registration number: CRD42014013106.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.395 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen HeartSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207