MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3117170262 · doi:10.1101/2020.12.17.20248333

Virtual care with digital technologies for rural and remote Canadians living with cardiovascular disease

2020· preprint· en· W3117170262 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan Buyting, Sarah Melville, Hanif Chatur, Christopher W. White, Jean‐François Légaré, Sohrab Lutchmedial, Keith R. Brunt

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsHorizon Health NetworkSaint John Regional HospitalDalhousie University
FundersNew Brunswick Innovation FoundationFondation de la recherche en santé du Nouveau-BrunswickDalhousie UniversityAGE-WELL
KeywordsHealth careGovernment (linguistics)BusinessPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)PopulationEquity (law)Rural areaHealth equityHealth technologyMedicinePublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthNursingGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Canada is a wealthy nation with a geographically diverse population, seeking health innovations to better serve patients in accordance with the Canada Health Act. In this country, population and geography converge with social determinants, policy, procurement regulations, and technological advances, in order to achieve equity in the management and distribution of healthcare. Rural and remote patients are a vulnerable population; when managing chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, there is inequity when it comes to accessing specialist physicians at the recommended frequency—increasing the likelihood of poor health outcomes. Ensuring equitable care for this population is an unrealized priority of several provincial and federal government mandates. Virtual care technology may provide practical, economical, and innovative solutions to remedy this discrepancy. Here we review the literature pertaining to the use of virtual care technologies to monitor patients with cardiovascular disease living in rural areas of Canada. A search strategy was developed to identify the literature specific to this context across three bibliographic databases. 166 unique citations were ultimately assessed for eligibility, of which 36 met the inclusion criteria. In our assessment of these articles, we provide a summary of the interventions studied, their reported effectiveness in reducing adverse events and mortality, the challenges to implementation, and the receptivity of these technologies amongst patients, providers and policy makers. Further, we glean insight into the barriers and opportunities to ensure equitable care for rural patients and conclude that there is an ongoing need for clinical trials assessing virtual care technologies in this context. Summary Patients living in rural and remote communities’ experience diverse challenges to receiving equitable healthcare as is mandated by the Canada Health Act. Advances in virtual care technology may provide practical, economical, and innovative solutions to ensure this for patients in remote and rural living situations. Here we provide a state-of-the-art review of virtual care technologies available to patients with cardiovascular disease living in rural areas of Canada.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.016
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→