MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3139092791 · doi:10.2196/24142

Twelve-Lead Electrocardiogram Acquisition With a Patchy-Type Wireless Device in Ambulance Transport: Simulation-Based Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3139092791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunyoung Yoon, Taerim Kim, Taehwan Roh, Hansol Chang, Sung Yeon Hwang, Hee Yoon, Tae Gun Shin, Min Seob Sim, Ik Joon Jo, Won Chul

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South Korea
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialLead (geology)Myocardial infarctionConfidence intervalTechnicianEmergency medical servicesMedical emergencyEmergency medicineCardiologyInternal medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death worldwide. Early recognition, diagnosis, and reperfusion are the key elements of treatment for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The absence of a prehospital 12-lead electrocardiogram (P12ECG) can cause definitive treatment delay and repeated transfer. Although guidelines highly recommend the measurement and transmission of P12ECG data, P12ECG use has not been widely established. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to verify the time-efficiency and feasibility of the use of a patchy-type 12-lead ECG measuring and transmitting device (P-ECG) by an emergency medical technician (EMT) in an ambulance during patient transport. METHODS: This was a simulation-based prospective randomized crossover-controlled study that included EMTs. The participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Group A began the experiment with a conventional 12-lead ECG (C-ECG) device and then switched to the intervention device (P-ECG), whereas group B began the experiment with the P-ECG and then switched to the C-ECG. All simulations were performed inside an ambulance driving at 30 km/h. The time interval was measured from the beginning of ECG application to completion of sending the results. After the simulation, participants were administered the System Usability Scale questionnaire about usability of the P-ECG. RESULTS: A total of 18 EMTs were recruited for this study with a median age of 35 years. The overall interval time for the C-ECG was 254 seconds (IQR 247-270), whereas the overall interval time for the P-ECG was 130 seconds (IQR 112-150), with a significant difference (P<.001). Significant differences between the C-ECG and P-ECG were identified at all time intervals, in which the P-ECG device was significantly faster in all intervals, except for the preparation interval in which the C-ECG was faster (P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of 12-lead ECG examination and transmission of the results using P-ECG are faster than those of C-ECG during ambulance transport. With the additional time afforded, EMTs can provide more care to patients and transport patients more rapidly, which may help reduce the symptoms-to-balloon time for patients with acute coronary syndrome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04114760; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04114760.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→