MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410761256 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19070414

Integrated Hands-Free Electronic Patient Care Report (ePCR) Charting (IHeC): Designing the Architecture

2025· article· en· W4410761256 on OpenAlexaff
Desmond Hedderson, Claudia K. Y. Lai

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nature of paramedic workloads typically results in incomplete or lack of patient care reports on patient handover to emergency department staff. Patient information gaps can increase emergency department staff's workload, cause care delays, and increase risks of adverse events. An integrated hands-free electronic patient care report (ePCR) could eliminate this gap. We conducted an environmental scan of the available literature on technologies to improve paramedic documentation and current advanced paramedic charting systems. Two technologies, speech recognition documentation and live telemetry sharing systems, were identified as potential improvements. A theoretical architecture for an integrated hands-free ePCR charting (IHeC) system was developed by combining these technologies. The ePCR could be completed and available upon patient arrival to the hospital using speech recognition and vital sign sharing technology. The IHeC system could solve the problem of patient information gaps and provide a platform for more advanced integration of paramedic services.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicElectronic Health Records Systems→French-language works237,207→