MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014297004 · doi:10.1097/jcn.0000000000000680

NursE led Atrial Fibrillation Management: The NEAT Study

2020· article· en· W3014297004 on OpenAlex
Celine Gallagher, J. Orchard, Karin Nyfort‐Hansen, Prashanthan Sanders, Lis Neubeck, Jeroen Hendriks

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHendrix Genetics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMotivational interviewingAtrial fibrillationQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialGuidelinePopulationRisk factorPhysical therapyPsychological interventionNursingInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a growing epidemic. Current models of care delivery are inadequate in meeting the needs of the population with AF. Furthermore, quality of life is known to be poor in patients with AF and is associated with adverse patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if nurse-led education and cardiovascular risk factor modification, undertaken using the principles of motivational interviewing, facilitated by an electronic decision support tool to ensure the appropriate use of oral anticoagulation (OAC), could improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL), guideline adherence to OAC, and cardiovascular risk factor profiles in individuals with AF. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled feasibility study of 72 individuals with AF. The intervention involved 1 face-to-face nurse-delivered education and risk factor management session with 4 follow-up telephone calls over a 3-month period to monitor progress. The primary outcome measure was HRQoL as assessed by the Short Form-12 survey. RESULTS: A total of 72 participants were randomized, with 36 individuals in each arm completing follow-up. Mean age was 65 ± 11 years and 44% were women. At 3 months follow-up, no significant differences between groups were observed for the physical or mental component summary scores of the Short Form-12, nor any of the subscales. Appropriate use of OAC did not differ between groups at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A brief nurse-delivered educational intervention did not significantly impact on HRQoL or risk factor status in individuals with AF. Further research should focus on interventions of greater intensity to improve outcomes in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12615000928516.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.269 · 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