Do urologists follow the golden rule? A global urolithiasis management study by the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this study was to compare surgical management options for various urolithiasis scenarios that urologists would choose for themselves vs. the options they would recommend for their patients. The secondary objective was to identify the common recommended treatments for upper urinary tract stones of various sizes and locations. METHODS: Two surveys were sent by the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) to members of the Endourological Society. Standard demographic information was collected. The first survey asked the urologists to recommend treatment for urolithiasis in 10 different scenarios assuming that they were the patient with stone disease. The second survey, sent eight months later, asked urologists to recommend treatment for the same 10 scenarios for a theoretical patient. Only urologists who responded to the first and the second survey were included. Recommended treatment options were compared between the surveys. Agreement between the two scenarios was measured with Cohen's kappa. Surveys were conducted on the Internet using SurveyMonkey™. All statistical analyses were performed using R statistical program version 2.12.2. RESULTS: The two surveys had response rates of 78% (160/205) and 84% (172/205), respectively with urologists from 38 countries. Median experience of respondents was seven years (range: 2-30). The majority of respondents, 117 (75%), were affiliated with academic hospitals. Recommended treatments for stone disease in different scenarios were not entirely consistent when the urologists considered themselves as the patients compared to the choice they might recommend for their patients. Cohen's kappa ranged from 0.292-0.534 for the different scenarios. Overall, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) were the most commonly chosen treatment options, with medical expulsive therapy (MET) and laparoscopy being the least recommended by urologists for themselves, as well as for their patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although urologists were not entirely consistent in their recommendations for stone treatment, they generally followed the "golden rule" and treated their patients as they would want to be treated. The most commonly recommended treatments for upper urinary tract stones were SWL and URS.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».