MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210843271 · doi:10.2196/preprints.30063

COVID-19 Assessment and Testing in Rural Communities During the Pandemic: Cross-sectional Analysis (Preprint)

2021· preprint· en· W4210843271 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Fitzsimon, Oliver Gervais, Chelsea Lanos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandPacific Safety Products (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriagePandemicCross-sectional studyFamily medicineMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Medical emergencyTelemedicineHealth careNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the need for urgent improvements in access to health care for rural, remote, and underserviced communities. The Renfrew County Virtual Triage and Assessment Centre (VTAC) was designed to provide access to COVID-19 testing and assessment with a family physician. The goal was to protect emergency departments and 911 paramedics while ensuring that nobody was left at home, suffering in silence. Residents were encouraged to call their own family physician for any urgent health needs. If they did not have a family physician or could not access their usual primary care provider, then they could call VTAC. This study reports on the output of a service model offering access to assessment and COVID-19 testing through a blend of virtual and in-person care options by a multidisciplinary team. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of VTAC to provide access to COVID-19 assessment and testing across rural, remote, and underserviced communities. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the data derived from the cases handled by VTAC between March 27, 2020 (launch day), and September 30, 2020. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Residents from all 19 census subdivisions and municipalities of Renfrew County accessed VTAC. A total of 10,086 family physician assessments were completed (average 64 per day). Of these, 8535 (84.6%) assessments were to unique patient users. Thirty physicians provided care. Using digital equipment setup in the patients’ home, 31 patients were monitored remotely. VTAC community paramedics completed 14,378 COVID-19 tests and 3875 home visits. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Renfrew County’s experience suggests that there is tremendous synergy between family physicians and community paramedics in providing access to COVID-19 assessment and COVID-19 testing. The blended model of virtual and in-person care is well suited to provide improved access to other aspects of health care post pandemic, particularly for patients without a family physician. </sec>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207