MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187490059 · doi:10.4103/gmit.gmit_66_20

Utilizing Telemedicine for Delivery of Postoperative Care Following Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery

2021· article· en· W3187490059 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Radtke, Randle Umeh, Martha Chavez, Zuleika V. Curiel, Karla Méndez

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeTelemedicineRandomized controlled trialPatient satisfactionHysterectomyPhysical therapySurgeryHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Determine if patient satisfaction is greater after delivering postoperative care via telemedicine following minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. Materials and Methods: University-based outpatient clinic; Randomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I). Females between 18 and 60 years of age scheduled to undergo laparoscopic hysterectomy or laparoscopic excision of endometriosis were invited to participate. Eligible patients were randomized to receive postoperative care either through a traditional office visit or via telemedicine. PSQ-18 satisfaction surveys were performed by phone after the visit. Results: Forty-one patients were analyzed out of which 25 were in the office group and 16 in the telemedicine group. Groups were homogenous to age (41.4 vs. 43.3 p. 48), body mass index (31.9 vs. 30.6 P = 0.52), distance in miles from home (12.7 vs. 12.4 P = 0.92), and parity ( P = 0.51). PSQ-18 questionnaire was scored and each category was compared between the office and telemedicine groups. When comparing medians (interquartile range), the general satisfaction and time spent with doctor categories were significantly higher in the telemedicine group (4.0 [4.0, 4.5] vs. 4.5 [4.5, 5.0] P = 0.05), (4.0 [4.0, 4.5] vs. 4.5 [4.0, 5.0] P = 0.05). The remainder of the categories analyzed were not different between groups Technical Quality (4.0 [3.8, 4.5] vs. 4.5 [3.9, 5.0] P = 0.13), Interpersonal Manner (4.0 [4.0, 4.5] vs. 4.5 [4.0, 5.0] P = 0.34), Communication (4.5 [4.0, 4.5] vs. 4.5 [4.3, 5.0] P = 0.21), Accessibility and Convenience (4.0 [3.5, 4.5] v 4.0 [3.6, 4.5] P = 0.84). A chart review was performed, examining the first 30 days after surgery. One (4%) patient in the office group went to the ER after postoperative visit, and 0 in the telemedicine group ( P = 0.42). Conclusion: Postoperative care via telemedicine after gynecologic surgery results in higher patient satisfaction.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGynecology and Minimally Invasive TherapySame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207