MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 14386: High Sensitivity Troponin: Implementation Before Education

2023· article· en· W4389956569 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Chebaya, Sanchari Banerjee, Nicholas Anand, Hiba Zafar, Andrew M. Weinberg, Kevin M. Smith, Vishal Phogat, Danielle Olonoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsCanarie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTroponinTriageEmergency departmentAcute coronary syndromeChest painInternal medicineTroponin TEmergency medicineCardiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Troponin T is strong indicator of Acute Myocardial Injury, however, concerns regarding its sensitivity have led to the inception of high sensitivity troponin (hscTn). The use of hscTn in clinical practice allows for an increased negative predictive value, which in turn can expedite triage and disposition of patients presenting with Acute Coronary Syndrome. The ACC/AHA have developed algorithms to provide a road map to aide in the interpretation of hscTn values and their indications. However, the understanding of the interpretation of test is integral hscTn in guiding management. Hypothesis: Evaluate if the implementation of hscTn within our hospital system decreased the amount of inappropriate diagnostic testing and admissions. Methods: A total of 602 patients consisting of two patient groups seen in our emergency department with the chief complaint of chest pain were studied. The troponin T group consisted of patient admitted between Jan 2021 to June 2021 (n=246) and the hscTn group between July 2021 - December 2021 (n=356). Baseline demographic and clinical comorbid characteristics were compared between both groups. Notable outcomes of interest were rates of admission as well as cardiac testing. Analysis was performed using T test for continuous variables and Chi squared test for categorical variables. Results: Admission rates were significantly increased in the hscTn group in comparison to the regular troponin group with proportions of 60.3% vs 39.7% respectively (p < 0.001). An 11 percent increase in inpatient cardiology consultation of the total visits occurred within the hscTn group vs the regular troponin group. When evaluating admitted patients, based on AHA guidelines for significant hscTn findings only 2% of those patients who were admitted met the criteria. Conclusions: The introduction of hscTn troponin within our hospital did not appear to decrease chest pain admissions regardless of its improved sensitivity and specificity. In contrast, rates were increased even when elevation was not significant, this may not be due to the test's efficacy but instead to the lack of education on its indications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→French-language works237,207→