MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400319056 · doi:10.1503/cjs.013023

Streamlining lung cancer management in Nova Scotia amid COVID-19: pooled triaging for expedited curative-intent oncologic surgery

2024· article· en· W4400319056 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Pooja Patel, Rheann Brownstone, Brianne M. Cruickshank, Connor Garagan, Daria Manos, Daniel French, Alison Wallace, Madelaine Plourde

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsMedicineReferralContext (archaeology)Lung cancerCardiothoracic surgeryRetrospective cohort studyCohortCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)General surgeryPandemicSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicineDiseaseFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and management of lung cancer in Canada is not fully understood. We sought to quantify the provincial volume of diagnostic imaging, thoracic surgeon referrals, time to surgery after referral, and pathologic staging for curative surgery in the context of the pandemic, as well as explore the effect of a pooled patient model, which was implemented to prioritize surgeries for lung cancer and mitigate the effects of the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent diagnostic imaging in Nova Scotia and were subsequently referred to a thoracic surgeon at the province’s only tertiary care centre for surgical management of their primary lung cancer before (Mar. 1, 2019, to Feb. 29, 2020) and during (Mar. 1, 2020, to Feb. 28, 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a survey to capture the patient and surgeon experience with a pooled patient model of managing surgical oncology cases. Results: Compared with the pre-COVID-19 period, the overall volume of chest radiography and chest computed tomography decreased by 30.9% (p < 0.001) and 18.7% (p = 0.002), respectively, in the COVID-19 period. Thoracic surgeon referrals, operative approach, extent of resection, length of hospital stay, and pathologic staging did not significantly differ. Time from referral to surgery was significantly shorter during the COVID-19 period (mean 196.8 d v. 157.9 d, p = 0.04). A pooled patient approach contributed to positive patient satisfaction. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with reductions in rates of diagnostic imaging and referrals to thoracic surgeons for management of pulmonary cancer. A pooled patient model was used to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on lung cancer management and was positively received by patients. An extended study period is needed to determine the full effect of this redistribution of resources.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Surgery→Same topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts→French-language works237,207→