MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411548600 · doi:10.1177/08404704251350064

Characterizing the impact of a novel electronic consultation platform on access to Hepatitis C treatment in Manitoba

2025· article· en· W4411548600 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lauren J MacKenzie, Laurie Ireland, Javier Mignone, L. Oppenheimer, Marissa Becker

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHealthcare Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)ReferralFamily medicineeHealthHepatitis CPrimary careHealth careNursingInternal medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access to Hepatitis C (HCV) treatment requires a specialist referral in Manitoba, Canada, with specialist availability posing barriers to HCV care. This work assessed the impact of eConsult, an electronic platform that enables Primary Care Providers (PCPs) to access specialist advice, potentially reducing face-to-face patient visits. This single case study was conducted at Nine Circles Community Health Centre in Winnipeg. Charts of individuals referred via traditional pathways (Dec. 2016-Dec. 2017) and eConsult (Dec. 2017 - Dec. 2019) were reviewed, and stakeholder interviews were conducted with PCPs and an HCV specialist. Compared to traditional referrals, eConsult patients were more likely to link to specialist care (100% vs. 69%, P = 0.026) and complete HCV treatment (79% vs. 36%, P = 0.049). The use of eConsult may improve access to HCV care in Manitoba, with outcomes shaped by system agility, adaptability across contexts, and the altruism of healthcare providers who support its use.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicHealthcare Systems and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207