Patient triage to specialist outpatient clinics—time to standardize terminology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate existing nomenclature used for outpatient referrals triage and propose a system, which meets the needs of McMaster Children's Hospital and can be modified for use in other hospitals. Methods: We reviewed triage practices in the Department of Pediatrics, McMaster Children Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario and conducted a literature search to assess terminology used for outpatient referrals triage at other institutions. Results: There is lack of unified terminology for triaging outpatient referrals. Existing systems are not widely accepted, lack uniformity, and often miss recording the true acuity of the referral. We developed a system that covers most outpatient triage scenarios, allocates either flexible or precise visit timelines to referrals and plans for logistics of the patient's visit. Triage categories are iMMediate (MM), Acute (A) (1 to 14 days), Semi-Acute (S) (1 to 3 months), Timetabled (T) (next available appointment slot), Evaluated (E) (used for either forwarding to another provider or requesting additional information), and Rejected (R) categories-McMASTER triage system. Several numbered subcategories are used in each category to define precise timelines, if needed. Visit logistics categories are the following: Hub (H) (place to see the patient), How to notify patient and referring provider (HP) and (HD), need to Start with tests prior to appointment (S), and need to Complete (C) other relevant local processes-HHSC logistics system. Both these systems may be adapted for local use in other institutions. Conclusion: This is the first publication that proposes terminology standardization in triaging outpatient referrals for specialist paediatric services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.169 | 0.195 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".