MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378782572 · doi:10.2196/34453

Patient Safety of Perioperative Medication Through the Lens of Digital Health and Artificial Intelligence

2023· article· en· W4378782572 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiancheng Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Perioperative Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatient safetyPerioperativeMedicinePsychological interventionHealth careMedical emergencyIntensive care medicineNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perioperative medication has made significant contributions to enhancing patient safety. Nevertheless, administering medication during this period still poses considerable safety concerns, with many errors being detected only after causing significant physiological disturbances. The intricacy of medication administration in the perioperative setting poses specific challenges to patient safety. To address these challenges, implementing potential strategies and interventions is critical. One such strategy is raising awareness and revising educational curricula regarding drug safety in the operating room. Another crucial strategy is recognizing the importance of redundancy and multiple checks in the operating room as a hallmark of medication safety, which is not a common practice. Digital health technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) also offer the potential to improve perioperative medication safety. Computerized physician order entry systems, electronic medication administration records, and barcode medication administration systems have been proven to reduce medication errors and improve patient safety. By implementing these strategies and interventions, health care professionals can enhance the safety of perioperative medication administration and improve patient outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Perioperative MedicineSame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207