MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396804076 · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000006337

Improving Environmental Sustainability of Operating Theatres

2024· review· en· W4396804076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Siya Lodhia, Victoria Pegna, Ruth Abrams, Daniel Jackson, Timothy Rockall, Chantelle Rizan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSustainabilityOperating theatresThematic analysisIncentiveHealth careInclusion (mineral)Medical educationPublic relationsQualitative researchMedical emergencyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To understand views of staff in relation to attitudes, enablers, and barriers to implementation of environmentally sustainable surgery in operating theatres. This will ultimately help in the goal of successfully implementing more sustainable theatres. BACKGROUND: Global health care sectors are responsible for 4.4% of greenhouse gas emissions. Surgical operating theatres are resource intensive areas and improvements will be important to meet Net-Zero carbon emissions within health care. METHODS: Three databases were searched (Web of Science, Ovid, and PubMed), last checked January 2024. We included original manuscripts evaluating staff views regarding sustainable operating theatres. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality appraisal and data analysed using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 2933 articles were screened and 14 fulfilled inclusion criteria, using qualitative (1), quantitative (2), and mixed methods (11). Studies were undertaken in a variety of clinical (Department of Anaesthesia, Surgery, Otolaryngology, Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Ophthalmology) and geographical settings (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand, United States, United Kingdom, and Ireland). Across studies there was a lack of evidence exploring enablers to implementation, but barriers mainly related to the following themes: education and awareness, leadership, resistance to change, facilities and equipment, time, and incentive. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review identified attitudes and barriers perceived by clinicians towards improving environmental sustainability within operating theatres, which may inform future strategy towards sustainable surgery. Most studies used a survey-design, whereas use of interviews may provide deeper insights. Future work should be extended to wider stakeholders influencing operating theatres. In addition, implementation studies should be carried out to examine whether barriers do change in practice.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.095 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207