A service evaluation of specialist nurse telephone follow-up of bowel cancer patients after surgery
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: has called for a reduction in the number of outpatient appointments to reduce pressure on hospital services and increase ease of access for patients. This article presents a service evaluation of an innovative, nurse-led telephone follow-up service for a group of elective bowel cancer patients following surgery. METHODS: the records of patients who underwent surgery over a 2-year period were accessed to determine the number of telephone follow-ups and other investigations. This was used to model the potential cost saving for commissioners against traditional clinic follow-up. Patient satisfaction was assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaire on Outpatient Satisfaction in 30 patients. RESULTS: feedback on the service was overwhelmingly positive, with patients praising the care received from the specialist nurses, but also commenting on increased continuity of care, ease of access and convenience. The service also potentially creates significant savings for commissioners as the agreed tariff for nurse telephone follow-up is significantly less than the outpatient tariff. DISCUSSION: this innovative follow-up system is well liked by patients and should provide savings for commissioners. The hospital also benefits from an increase in capacity to see new or more unwell patients, and a reduction in carbon emissions. Such a service, however, is dependent on people, and although it has functioned effectively in this department for approximately 20 years, it would only be generalisable to other units if staff had appropriate expertise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it