The development of an educational resource for patients post myocardial infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In Newfoundland and Labrador, heart disease is the second leading cause of death (Botly, 2020). Patient education for this population is imperative to improve patients’ health literacy and ability to self-manage their own heart disease. An informal needs assessment determined that Eastern Health needed an updated patient educational resource for this patient population. Purpose: To develop a patient resource for patients newly diagnosed with heart disease and admitted to hospital, to help this patient population better self-manage their heart health following discharge. Method: A literature review was completed to identify the benefits of patient education while in hospital and topics of information to include in this educational resource. As well, consultations were completed with staff and patients of a cardiac care unit. Finally, an environmental scan was completed for similar resources available elsewhere in Canada. Results: Key topics derived from the literature, included physical activity, healthy eating, mental health, and medications as being important components of patient education. The literature also showed that education received while in hospital leads to a lower rate of readmission for cardiac patients and better self-management. In consultation with staff and patients, it was determined that a gap existed in patient education regarding cardiac tests and procedures, explanations on heart disease and anatomy. It was also identified that it was necessary to provide this information in a patient resource. A review of resource manuals was made available by the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the University of Ottawa’s Heart Institute. A patient resource manual that is 53 pages in length was developed to meet this need and includes information to address gaps in current patient education provided to cardiac patients admitted to hospital. Conclusion: This resource manual based on the literature, key themes and consultations will help patients to better understand their condition, be more prepared for tests and procedures while they are in hospital and adopt healthy lifestyle changes that they are able to maintain post discharge.
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 | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.006 |
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".