Patient satisfaction with outpatient management of sickle cell pain crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) causing pain is the most common reason for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) to present to the emergency department (ED) for assessment. There have been many identified barriers to the provision of quality care in the ED setting for patients experiencing VOC. As a result, many SCD patients prefer to avoid the ED if possible. Patients followed by the Edmonton Hemoglobinopathy Clinic experiencing early VOC symptoms can present to the Medical Outpatient Unit (MOU), to be assessed and receive treatment from their personalized pain plan. We conducted a survey of SCD patients to assess their satisfaction with treatment in MOU. Methods: The study population was adult patients with diagnosis of SCD followed by the Hemoglobinopathy Clinic in Edmonton. Those with a prior presentation to MOU were given the survey to complete on a voluntary basis, from January to July 2025. The survey included 13 questions on a 1-5 Likert scale pertaining to aspects of their care at MOU as opposed to the ED (Table 1). Responses of “satisfied” or “very satisfied” were counted as being satisfied with the statement, while responses of “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” were counted as being dissatisfied. Results: 47 patients completed the survey with a mean age of 35 years (min 18, max 70). There was a high level of satisfaction with each of the statements (75-98%), including statements related to respect and knowledge of healthcare providers, receiving appropriate pain medications, and the location and facility features in the MOU. 80% of patients were satisfied that available appointment times were convenient for them. Conclusions: Overall, this study demonstrated high patient satisfaction with VOC treatment in the MOU. This will be especially important with recent changes resulting in MOU being used for ED overflow limiting the amount of MOU appointments available.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".