MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404579041 · doi:10.5430/jha.v13n2p77

Discoveries and insights from implementing telehealth in a tele-acute unit: A retrospective study

2024· article· en· W4404579041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gregory N. Orewa, Erin E Blanchard, Sue S. Feldman, Bart Kelly, Terri Scarborough, William S. Stigler, Eric Wallace, Abdulaziz Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthUnit (ring theory)TelemedicineMedicineRetrospective cohort studyMedical emergencyComputer sciencePsychologyHealth careSurgeryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study examines the impact of telehealth nursing interventions on length of stay (LOS) and ratio of LOS to risk-adjusted length of stay comparing tele-acute and traditional units.Methods: Retrospective data from 6,999 patient visits at tele-acute and traditional hospital units between Q2 2020 and Q4 2022 were collected. Bivariate analysis and the Mann-Whitney U Test were used to determine statistical significance. Multivariate regression was conducted to analyze the factors affecting both LOS and the ratio.Results: Regardless of the model, the findings suggest that LOS was greater in the traditional unit. In the LOS model, the stay was 7 hours and 39 minutes longer per admission in the traditional unit. In the risk-adjusted ratio model, the LOS was 5 hours and 14 minutes longer per admission than in the tele-acute unit.Conclusions: This study contributes to a body of literature that is lacking in the use of telehealth nursing in the acute care setting. Our research offers new perspectives on how telehealth can affect operational measures like LOS and discharge times. This contribution is important as it broadens the scope of telehealth’s benefits beyond traditional remote care, highlighting its potential in fast-paced, acute care settings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207