MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003524790 · doi:10.52236/ih.v7i2.148

RELIABILITAS SISTEM TRIASE DALAM PELAYANAN GAWAT DARURAT : A REVIEW

2019· review· id· W3003524790 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntan Husada Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan · 2019
Typereview
Languageid
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageHumanitiesPsychologyMedicineMedical emergencyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pendahuluan.Triase dalam pelayanan gawat darurat adalah proses pengambilan keputusan yang diterapkan untuk mengidentifikasi pasien dan mengoptimalkan sumber daya. Sejak 1990 hingga tahun 2000 telah dirancang triase 5 skala diantaranya: Australian Triage Scale (ATS), Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), Manchester Triage Scale (MTS), dan Emergency Severity Index (ESI). Sehingga timbul pertanyaan tentang keandalan skala triase (reliabilitas). Pada review kali ini penulis akan fokus pada berbagai macam skala triase, penggunaannya di beberapa negara, dan reliabilitasnya. Penulis tidak akan menulis kembali pedoman/guideline dari triase yang telah secara resmi terpublikasikan.
 Metode. Penelusuran ini dilakukan mulai dari Januari hingga Maret 2019 dengan melakukan penelusuran database: PubMed, EMBASE, dan CINAHL. Kata kunci yang digunakan: ‘Triage in emergency 'ATAU' Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale’ ATAU ‘Emergency Severity Index’ ATAU ‘Manchester Triage Scale’ ATAU ‘Australasian Triage Scale’. Kriteria inklusi: uji acak terkendali (randomized controlled tria), studi retrospektif, observasional, studi kasus, review, systematc review, dan meta analisis. Hasil akhir review menemukan 12 artikel yang sesuai
 Hasil. Uji statistik Kappa menunjukan reliabilitas ATS 0,428 (95% CI 0,340-0,509), reliabilitas CTAS 0,871 (95% CI (0,840-0,897), reliabilitas ESI 0.730 (95% CI : 0.692 hingga 0.767), reliabilitas MTS 0,751 (CI 95%: 0,677 hingga 0,810).
 Kesimpulan. Berdasarkan hasil reliabilitas nilai ATS menunjukan realibilitas terkecil, realibilitas CTAS merupakan yang tertinggi, namun memiliki keterbatasan pada pelaksaan diluar Kanada. MTS merupakan skala yang reliabilitas dan juga penerapannya dianggap yang paling baik.
 
 Kata Kuci: Reliabilitas, Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAAS), Emergency Severity Index (ESI), Manchester Triage Scale (MTS), Australasian Triage Scale (ATS).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.020

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.239 · 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