MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137085367 · doi:10.1177/20503121211001145

Remote certification of out-of-hospital deaths in a Canadian Province: An 8-year experience of a novel practice

2021· article· en· W3137085367 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alain Tanguay, J Lebon, Denise Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesCégep de Lévis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationMedicineMedical emergencyMedical examinerCause of deathMedical recordFamily medicineEmergency medicinePoison controlInjury preventionDiseaseSurgeryManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Certification of out-of-hospital deaths is challenging as physicians are often unavailable at the scene. In these situations, emergency medical services will generally transport the decedent to the nearest hospital. In 2011, a remote death certification program was implemented in the province of Québec, Canada. The program was managed through an online medical control center and enabled death certification by a remote physician. We sought to evaluate the implementation and feasibility of the remote death certification program and to describe the challenges we experienced. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all remote death certification requests received at the online medical control center between 2011 and 2019. Data were collected from the online medical control center database and records. Feasibility was determined by evaluating the remote death certification rate. Results: Overall, 84.1% of remote death certification requests were realized, producing a total of 9776 death certificates. Male decedents accounted for 61.5% of remote death certification requests and were more likely than females to undergo a coroner’s investigation for cause of death (36.3% vs 20.8%, p = 0.017). Urban/mixed regions had higher rates of achieved remote death certifications (mean 87.3% vs 76.9%, p = 0.033) and putrefied bodies (mean 3.8% vs 2.2%, p = 0.137) compared to rural regions. Among unrealized remote death certification requests, the most common reason was failure of relatives to designate a funeral home (36.8%). Conclusion: Our 8-year experience with the remote death certification program demonstrates that despite facing numerous challenges, this process is feasible and offers a valuable option to manage out-of-hospital deaths. The remote death certification program is spreading in the remaining regions of Québec. Future studies will aim to quantify how much time this process saves for emergency medical services in each region of the province.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE Open MedicineSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207