MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304190621 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210140

Variation in low-value radiograph use for children in the emergency department: a cross-sectional study of administrative databases

2022· article· en· W4304190621 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Gabrielle Freire, Christina Diong, Sima Gandhi, Natasha Saunders, Mark I. Neuman, Stephen B. Freedman, Jeremy Friedman, Eyal Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenChildren's Hospital FoundationAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsEmergency departmentCross-sectional studyVariation (astronomy)MedicineDatabaseValue (mathematics)Computer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radiograph use contributes to low-value care for children in emergency departments (EDs), but little is known about systemic factors associated with their use. This study compares low-value radiograph use across ED settings by hospital type, pediatric volumes and physician specialty. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of routinely collected administrative data. We included children (age 0-18 yr) discharged from EDs in Ontario, Canada, between 2010 and 2019 with diagnoses of bronchiolitis, asthma, abdominal pain and constipation. Multiple clinical practice guidelines recommend against routine radiograph use in these conditions. Logistic regression evaluated odds of low-value radiograph by ED setting (pediatric academic [referent], adult academic, community with or without pediatric consultation services), pediatric volume and physician specialty (pediatric emergency medicine [PEM, referent], emergency medicine [EM], family medicine with EM training, pediatrics, family medicine), adjusting for demographic, clinical and provider characteristics. We used generalized estimating equations to account for clustering by ED. RESULTS: Of the total 9 862 787 eligible pediatric ED discharges in Ontario, 60 914 children had bronchiolitis, 141 921 asthma, 333 332 abdominal pain and 110 514 constipation; 26.0% received low-value radiographs. Compared with pediatric EDs and PEM physicians (referents), patients with bronchiolitis were most likely to have a chest radiograph in adult academic EDs (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 5.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6-5.6]) and by family physicians with EM training (adjusted OR 4.8 [95% CI 4.5-5.1]). Patients with asthma were more likely to have a chest radiograph in adult academic EDs (adjusted OR 3.0 [95% CI 2.8-3.2]) and by EM physicians (adjusted OR 2.8 [95% CI 2.6-3.0]). Patients with abdominal pain and constipation were more likely to have abdominal radiographs in community hospitals with pediatric consultation (adjusted OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.6-1.7] and 2.3 [95% CI 2.3-2.4], respectively) and by family physicians with EM training (adjusted OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.6-1.7] and 2.1 [95% CI 2.0-2.2], respectively). INTERPRETATION: Over the decade-long study period, low-value radiograph use was frequent for children with 4 common conditions seen in Ontario EDs. Quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing unnecessary radiographs in children should focus on EM physicians practising in EDs that primarily treat adult patients.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.658
GPT teacher head0.603
Teacher spread0.055 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207