MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of real-world remote symptom monitoring program on hospitalizations and ICU admissions.

2024· article· en· W4402987259 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle B. Rocque, Jeffrey Franks, Luqin Deng, Nicole E. Caston, Courtney Williams, Andrés Azuero, Bradford E. Jackson, Chelsea McGowen, Bryanna Diaz, Carrie C. McNair, Sheila McElhany, D’Ambra Dent, Noon Eltoum, Joud El Dick, Katherine Parks, Bryan J. Weiner, Doris Howell, Angela M. Stover, Ethan Basch, Jennifer Young Pierce

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Oncology Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Nursing Research
KeywordsMedicineEmergency medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

377 Background: Previous randomized controlled trials have demonstrated benefits to patients from remote symptom monitoring (RSM) with electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) including healthcare utilization. However, less is known about the impact of RSM in diverse, real-world populations. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis from a hybrid, type 2 implementation-effectiveness trial evaluated the impact of RSM on healthcare utilization amongst patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy, monoclonal antibody, or targeted therapy at two academiccancer centers in the Southeastern United States. Modified Poisson regression models with robust standard error and 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to calculate the relative risk (RR) of any hospital or ICU utilization between patients receiving RSM and controls for 3 and 6 months after index date. Models were controlled for age at index, race, sex, cancer type, cancer stage, insurance, prior treatment, comorbidities, RUCA, and follow-up during COVID-19 pandemic. Additional logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for subset analysis stratified by race (Black or African American, Other, or White), rurality using Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes, and neighborhood disadvantage using Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Results: From 5/2021-2/2024, 1215 patients were enrolled in RSM; 27% were Black, 16% lived in a rural area, and 25% lived in an area with high neighborhood disadvantage. The populations receiving RSM were similar to the control population (n = 4559); 26% were Black, 22% lived in a rural area, and 28% lived in area with high neighborhood disadvantage. The unadjusted relative risk of hospitalization for patients receiving RSM and control patients were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.63-0.70) and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.85), respectively. In adjusted analyses, hospitalizations were lower amongst patients receiving RSM compared to control patients with a RR of 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.92). Similar patterns were observed for ICU admissions (RR 0.59; 95% CI,0.40-0.88). Analysis by patient subgroup was similar to the overall analysis. A lower odd of hospitalizations and ICU admissions at 6 months was observed across all subset analyses: Black vs. White patients (OR 0.80; OR 0.48); rural vs. urban patients (OR 0.78; OR 0.68); and patients living in areas of high vs. lower neighborhood disadvantage (OR 0.59; OR 0.33). Conclusions: The use of RSM amongst patients receiving treatment for cancer is associated with reductions in hospitalizations and ICU admissions in real-world, diverse settings. Further work to expand this intervention nationally is needed. Clinical trial information: NCT04809740 .

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.435 · 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 designOther design
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Oncology PracticeSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207