MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4365146045 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8136

Implementation of a clinical practice guideline for assessment and management of renal colic in the emergency department

2023· article· en· W4365146045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cecile T. Pham, Nicholas Hui, Regine Yan, Emma Richardson, Salonee Phanse, Jordan E. Cohen, George McClintock, Ahilan Parameswaran, Matthew Smith, Andrew Mitterdorfer, John Boulas, Paul Gassner, Dinesh K. Patel, Paul Sved

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal colicGuidelineEmergency departmentMedicineClinical PracticeMedical emergencyEmergency medicineFamily medicineNursingAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Renal colic is a common emergency department (ED) presentation. Variations in assessment and management of suspected renal colic may have significant implications on patient and hospital outcomes. We developed a clinical practice guideline to standardize the assessment and management of renal colic in the ED. We subsequently compared outcomes before and after guideline implementation. METHODS: The guideline standardizes the analgesia regimen, urology consult criteria, imaging modality, patient education, and followup instructions. This is a single-center, observational cohort study of patients presenting to the ED with renal colic prospectively collected after guideline implementation (December 2018 to May 2019) compared to a control group retrospectively collected before guideline implementation (December 2017 to May 2018). A total of 528 patients (pre-guideline n=283, post-guideline n=245) were included. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS using multivariate linear regression. RESULTS: ED length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter after guideline implementation (pre-guideline 295.82±178.8 minutes vs. post-guideline 253.2±118.2 minutes, p=0.017). The number of computed tomography (CT) scans patients received was significantly less after guideline implementation (pre guideline 1.35±1.34 vs. post-guideline 1.00±0.68, p=0.034). Patients discharged for conservative management had a lower re-presentation rate in the post-guideline group (12.6%) than the pre-guideline group (17.2%); however, this did not reach statistical significance (p=0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a clinical practice guideline for ureteric stones reduces the ED LOS and the total number of CT scan in patients who present with renal colic. Standardizing assessment and management of ureteric stones can potentially improve patient and hospital outcomes without compromising the quality of care.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments→French-language works237,207→