Cardiac Link: a retrospective cohort study evaluating a clinical pathway for expedited cardiology referral
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Outpatients presenting with chest pain often face long wait times for cardiology consultation and subsequent investigation for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), during which adverse cardiovascular events may occur. Our objective was to describe the design of Cardiac Link, a coronary computed tomography angiogram (CCTA)-guided rapid-access program, and evaluate its effect on cardiology consultation wait times in patients who present to primary care physicians with stable chest pain. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, between 2017 and 2020 involving eligible patients from the Family Practice Health Centre who underwent CCTA after presenting with stable chest pain or equivalent symptoms. Referring primary care physicians decided on a patient-by-patient basis to opt into the Cardiac Link program when requesting CCTA. Our primary outcome was measure of time from CCTA to cardiology consultation, and our secondary outcomes were measures of time to diagnosis from primary care consultation and CCTA booking time. Results: Our analysis included 148 patients (Cardiac Link n = 98, non–Cardiac Link n = 50). Mean age of the patients was 58.4 (SD 11.2) years and 72% (107/148) were women. We found that the Cardiac Link group had a shorter time from CCTA to cardiology consultation (median 7 [interquartile range {IQR} 6–20] d v. median 100 [IQR 40–138] d; p = 0.01), shorter time to diagnosis (median 33 [IQR 22–55] d v. median 86 [IQR 40–112] d; p < 0.001) and shorter CCTA booking time (median 18 [IQR 11–31] d v. median 65 [IQR 24–92] d; p < 0.001) compared with the non–Cardiac Link group. Interpretation: We determined that the Cardiac Link program reduced cardiology consultation wait times for symptomatic patients who were suspected of having CAD. Our study shows the viability of CCTA-guided rapid-access programs to expedite specialist consultation and reduce unnecessary referral for patients presenting to primary care physicians with stable chest pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".