MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404787438 · doi:10.5811/westjem.20942

Beirut Port Blast: Use of Electronic Health Record System During a Mass Casualty Event

2024· article· en· W4404787438 on OpenAlexaff
Eveline Hitti, Dima Hadid, Miriam Saliba, Zouhair Sadek, Rima Jabbour, Rula Antoun, Mazen El Sayed

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical emergencyMass CasualtyPort (circuit theory)Electronic health recordEvent (particle physics)Mass-casualty incidentEmergency medicinePoison controlSuicide preventionHealth careEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Emergency departments (ED) play a central role in defining the effectiveness and quality of the overall hospital's mass casualty incident (MCI) response. The use of electronic health records (EHR) in hospital settings has been rapidly growing globally. There is, however, a paucity of literature on the use and performance of EHR during MCIs. Methods: In this study we aimed to describe EHR use, as well as the challenges and lessons learnt in response to the 2020 explosion in the Port of Beirut, Lebanon, during which the hospital received over 360 casualties. Results: Information technology support, reducing EHR system restrictions, cross-function training, focus on registration and patient identification, patient flow and tracking, mobility and bedside access, and alternate sites of care are all important areas to focus on during emergency/disaster response planning. Conclusion: Innovative solutions that help address logistical challenges for different aspects of the disaster response are needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.454
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207