MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408050239 · doi:10.2196/58582

The Utilization of Electronic Consultations (eConsults) to Address Emerging Questions Related to Long COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada: Mixed Methods Analysis

2025· article· en· W4408050239 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jatinderpreet Singh, Michael Quon, Danica Goulet, Clare Liddy

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioOttawa HospitalQueen's UniversityBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TelemedicineFamily medicineService (business)Primary careMedical emergencyHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Long COVID is an often debilitating condition affecting millions of people. Its diverse clinical presentations make effective diagnosis and management at the primary care level difficult, while specialist services for long COVID face extensive wait times. An electronic consultation (eConsult) program in Ontario developed a long COVID specialist group to allow primary care providers (PCPs) prompt access to specialist advice for patients with long COVID. Objective: This study aims to assess patterns of service use, response times, impact, and clinical content of eConsult cases submitted to an eConsult long COVID specialist group in Ontario. Methods: This study is a mixed methods analysis of eConsults submitted by PCPs to the long COVID specialist group of 2 eConsult services (Champlain eConsult BASE and Ontario eConsult) between June 1, 2021, and July 31, 2022. Data sources included the use data collected automatically by the services, responses to a mandatory closeout survey, and the content of PCP questions and specialist responses (Champlain eConsult BASE service only). Clinical questions or responses were analyzed using 2 validated taxonomies. Descriptive statistics were used for survey responses and use data. Results: A total of 40 PCPs submitted 47 eConsults through Champlain eConsult BASE and 197 PCPs submitted 228 cases through Ontario eConsult. The median specialist response time was 0.6 (IQR 0.19-2.36; mean 1.7, SD 2.29) days. The 5 most common symptoms of long COVID were fatigue (14/47, 30%), dyspnea (7/47, 15%), cough (6/47, 13%), altered sense of smell (ie, anosmia and parosmia; 6/47, 13%), and cognitive changes (6/47, 13%). The five main question categories asked by PCPs were: (1) management of chronic symptoms of COVID-19, (2) need for additional work-up or follow-up testing, (3) community resources to support or manage patients with long COVID, (4) diagnostic clarification, and (5) guidance regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions: The long COVID groups provided rapid access to a multispecialty service that facilitated the avoidance of unnecessary face-to-face referrals. An assessment of eConsults highlighted 5 common question types, providing insight into potential gaps in knowledge among PCPs that could help guide medical education and policy.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207