MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121168300 · doi:10.1177/1357633x20982737

Utilization of telehealth in paediatric genome-wide sequencing: Health services implementation issues in the CAUSES Study

2021· article· en· W3121168300 on OpenAlexaff
Alison M. Elliott, Nick Dragojlovic, Teresa Campbell, Shelin Adam, Christèle du Souich, Michele Fryer, Anna Lehman, Clara van Karnebeek, Larry D. Lynd, Jan M. Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesProvincial Health Services AuthorityBC Children's HospitalWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthGenetic counselingMedicineExome sequencingGenetic testingGeneticistFamily medicineHealth carePediatricsTelemedicineGeneticsBiologyMutationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Genome-wide sequencing (exome or whole genome) is transforming the care and management of paediatric patients with a rare disease because of its diagnostic capabilities. Genome-wide sequencing is most effective when both parents and the child are sequenced as a trio. Genetic counselling is recommended for all families considering genome-wide sequencing. Although telehealth is well established in genetic counselling for hereditary cancer and prenatal genetics, its use with genome-wide sequencing has not been well studied. The CAUSES Clinic at BC Children’s and Women’s Hospitals was a translational paediatric trio-based genome-wide sequencing initiative. Pre-test genetic counselling via telehealth (at a clinical site near the family’s residence) was offered to families who had been previously evaluated by a clinical geneticist. We report on the first 300 families seen in the CAUSES clinic and compare health services implementation issues of families seen via telehealth versus on-site. Methods Demographics, cost to families (travel and time), time to first appointment, complete trio sample accrual and diagnostic rates were studied. Results Of the 300 patients, 58 (19%) were seen via telehealth and 242 (81%) were seen on-site for pre-test counselling. The mean time to completion of accrual of trio samples in the telehealth group was 56.3 (standard deviation ±87.3) days versus 18.9 (standard deviation ±62.4) days in the onsite group ( p < 2.2 × 10 −16 ). The mean per-family estimated actual or potential travel/time cost savings were greater in the telehealth group (Can$987; standard deviation = Can$1151) than for those seen on-site (Can$305; standard deviation = Can$589) ( p = 0.0004). Conclusions Telehealth allowed for access to genome-wide sequencing for families in remote communities and for them to avoid significant travel and time costs; however, there was a significant delay to accrual of the complete trio samples in the telehealth group, impacting on time of result reporting and delaying diagnoses for families for whom genome-wide sequencing was diagnostic.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207