MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307760713 · doi:10.3389/fstro.2022.1014480

Improving access and efficiency of ischemic stroke treatment across four Canadian provinces using a stepped wedge trial: Methodology

2022· article· en· W4307760713 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Noreen Kamal, Shadi Aljendi, Alix Carter, Elena Adela Cora, Tania Chandler, Fraser Clift, Patrick T. Fok, Judah Goldstein, Gordon Gubitz, Michael D. Hill, Bijoy K. Menon, Brian L. Metcalfe, Kelly Mrklas, Stephen Phillips, Scott Theriault, Etienne van der Linde, David Volders, Heather Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Stroke · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of CalgaryMemorial University of NewfoundlandQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreGovernment of Nova ScotiaSt. John’s Health Sciences CentreSaint John Regional HospitalGovernment of Newfoundland and LabradorDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAttendanceMedicineThrombolysisStroke (engine)Intervention (counseling)Nova scotiaPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialGeographySurgeryInternal medicineNursingEngineeringMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Ischemic stroke is treatable with thrombolysis and/or endovascular treatment. Both treatments are highly time dependent, as faster treatment results in better outcomes. Utilization of both of these treatments is less than optimal, and treatment times continue to exceed the recommended benchmarks. An improvement intervention was launched across Atlantic Canada, which has four provinces: Nova Scotia (NS), New Brunswick (NB), Prince Edward Island (PEI), and Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). The intervention was conducted through the ACTEAST (Atlantic Canada Together Enhancing Acute Stroke Treatment) Project, which aimed to improve access and efficiency of treatment for acute ischemic stroke patients. Intervention and methods The improvement intervention was a 6-month virtual Improvement Collaborative that consisted of each stroke center assembling an interdisciplinary team, 2 full-day Learning Sessions, five to six 1-h webinars, and a site visit for each team. The Improvement Collaborative intervention was implemented using a stepped-wedge trial design, where the intervention was delivered in 3 phases. The Improvement Collaborative was initially conducted with NS, followed by NB and PEI, and the final phase was with NL. The number of participants enrolled across all 34 hospitals were 98, 86, and 72 for NS, NB-PEI, and NL, respectively. The attendance at the Learning Sessions ranged from 43 to 81 across all 3 clusters. The attendance at webinars had a mean of 29.0 (SD 6.8), 26.0 (SD 6.3), and 19.0 (SD 8.5) for the NS, NB-PEI, and NL clusters respectively. (Anticipated) Results We anticipate that an additional 3–5% of ischemic stroke patients will receive thrombolysis, EVT, or both. Additionally, we anticipate a reduction of 10–15 min in door-to-needle times across the region. This will translate to an increase in the proportion of ischemic stroke patients that will be discharged home from acute care. Discussion High level of engagement is possible in an Improvement Collaborative Intervention when implemented using a stepped-wedge trial design. The highest level of engagement was observed in the NS cluster, which maybe because this province has the most established provincial stroke system. Physician engagement, a critical aspect of improvement, was high. COVID-19 restrictions likely led to lower attendance at site visits.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in StrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207