MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405221176 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083332

Synthesis of existing literature on the colorectal surgery patients’ challenges during hospital-to-home transitions: a scoping review protocol

2024· review· en· W4405221176 on OpenAlexaffabout
Auden Steane, Hardeep Singh, Ani Orchanian‐Cheff, Sami A. Chadi, Karen Okrainec

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal surgeryProtocol (science)General surgeryColorectal cancerSurgeryAlternative medicineAbdominal surgeryInternal medicinePathologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Despite advances in innovation to improve patients' transition experiences, it is unclear-in the context of colorectal surgery-what elements of patient education and care could provide the greatest benefit to patient experiences and clinical outcomes. Thus, this scoping review protocol aims to outline a plan to synthesise the existing literature from countries with publicly funded health systems (ie, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the USA) on the challenges experienced by colorectal surgery patients' when transitioning home from the hospital. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a scoping review to identify literature relating to adult patient challenges experienced when transitioning from hospital to home following colorectal surgery. We will search the following databases for studies published between 2012 and present: Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid). Title, abstract and full-text review will be conducted independently by at least two reviewers. Data will be extracted, collated, summarised and reported numerically (eg, frequency counts) and presented using descriptive summaries. In addition, data related to the challenges reported by colorectal surgery patients during their transition home from the hospital will be descriptively analysed using deductive content analysis. The extracted challenges will be categorised according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and the surgical transition trajectory (eg, predischarge, during discharge and postdischarge) to identify when in the patient journey is the best point to implement improved practices and achieve patient-centred care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol does not require ethics approval as data have not been collected or analysed. The findings will highlight insights into patient care transitions following colorectal surgery, which will be disseminated via publications and presentations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryFrench-language works237,207