MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975430411 · doi:10.1159/000502602

An Integrated Kidney Care eConsult Practice Model: Results from the iKinect Project

2019· article· en· W2975430411 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Nephrology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHealthcare Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family MedicineUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralTriageKidney diseaseFamily medicineNephrologyPrimary careDisease managementEmergency medicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Collaborative management of kidney disease relies on coordinated and effective partnerships between multiple provider teams. Siloed care contributes to limited access between physicians, resulting in delays in the diagnosis and treatment of kidney disease and inappropriate use of healthcare resources. These gaps contribute to dissatisfied and disempowered providers and patients. Digital systems such as eConsult can support collaborative management and address these gaps, thereby streamlining the consultation and referral process between primary care physicians (PCPs) and nephrologists. In this study, we evaluated an established eConsult platform integrated with a central triage process for a network of PCPs and nephrologists. The study aimed to assess the acceptability, feasibility, and impact on access to nephrology when using eConsult integrated into the management of kidney disease between PCPs and nephrologists. METHODS: We conducted a 1-year pilot study and used mixed methods to measure the acceptability and feasibility of using eConsult for the management of kidney disease. We compared eConsult and traditional referrals with respect to types of consultation, referrals, and times to response to determine impact on access to kidney care. We conducted semi-structured interviews of PCPs and nephrologists to assess physician experience. RESULTS: From January 8, 2018, to January 11, 2019, 52 PCPs and 23 nephrologists participated in the study, with 250 traditional referrals and 106 eConsults submitted during that period. The median response time for eConsult was 15 (3-64) h, with 25% originating outside the central Toronto region. The median time to first clinic appointment from a traditional referral was 4 months (111 [61-163] days). PCP and nephrologist interviews revealed high user satisfaction, citing efficiency and timely response as key facilitators. CONCLUSION: The eConsult platform was acceptable, feasible, and facilitated access to nephrology care compared to traditional referrals. Physicians report improvements in physician care delivery, nephrology care gaps, patient experience, and healthcare utilization.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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