MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sociotechnical Design of an Electronic Tool for Managing Transient Ischemic Attack in the Emergency Department

2015· article· en· W58838779 on OpenAlexaffabout
Francis Lau, Colin Partridge, Andrew M. Penn, Dana Stanley, Kristine Votova, Maximilian B. Bibok, Devin Harris, Linghong Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsProvincial Health Services AuthorityIsland HealthUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociotechnical systemTriageEmergency departmentTest (biology)Computer scienceDecision support systemMedical emergencyProcess managementEngineering managementSystems engineeringMedicineEngineeringKnowledge managementNursingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the adoption of a prototype electronic decision support tool for managing transient ischemic attack (TIA) in the Emergency Department (ED) of a health region in Canada. A clinician-driven sociotechnical design approach is used to develop, test and implement the prototype with the aim to improve TIA management in the ED. In this study, we worked closely with ED staff to: identify issues and needs in TIA management; build/test/refine prototype versions of the electronic TIA decision support tool; and explore strategies to implement the tool for routine use in the ED. A blood protein biomarker test under development will also be incorporated as part of this tool in a subsequent phase. Thus far the prototype has demonstrated the potential to improve triage, risk stratification, and disposition decisions based on historical TIA and mimic cases. A prospective multi-site clinical utility study is planned for spring of 2016.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.245
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207