A258 SHAPLEY VALUE ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING WILLINGNESS TO RETURN TO COLON CANCER SCREENING.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In 2016 colorectal cancer (CRC) was the second and third most common cause of death for Canadian men and women, respectively. Colon cancer screening can reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC. The British Columbia Cancer Agency’s Colon Screening Program (BCCSP) uses the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) for screening average risk participants aged 50–74. Participants with positive FITs are referred on for colonoscopy. The benefits of colon cancer screening programs are gained by initiation and repeat periodic screening if testing is negative. Participant satisfaction is an important quality indicator in colonoscopy, but there is limited data on how components of colon cancer screening drive dissatisfaction, willingness to refer the program to others, and willingness to return for repeat screening. Marketing companies have used a calculation called the Shapley Value as a tool to answer these questions. We present a novel method to analyze components of participant dissatisfaction in colon cancer screening by using a statistical tool called the Shapley Value. Two surveys were issued randomly to individuals in the BCCSP in 2016. One set were participants who underwent FIT screening and had a negative result. The other group had positive FITs and underwent colonoscopy. Data was collected from surveys where by participants answered responses in Likert-type scale with five possible responses ranging from with “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree”. The Shapley value was calculated for collections of factors to determine which components of colon cancer screening determined dissatisfaction, willingness to refer the program to others, and willingness to return for repeat screening. In the FIT negative survey, an important factor in determining dissatisfaction was the information provided by the doctor about colon cancer screening. The result letter was important in terms of determining willingness to return and willingness to recommend colon cancer screening. In those participants who were surveyed after a colonoscopy, an important factor in determining satisfaction was the doctor who did their colonoscopy. An important factor in determining willingness to recommend colon cancer screening was whether participants felt their doctor had adequate knowledge of their medical history. The Shapely value identified factors influencing colon screening participant’s likelihood of returning for screening and of referring others for screening. It is important to distinguish drivers for returning to screening versus dissatisfaction, as some survey items reporting dissatisfaction were not associated with an unwillingness to return to screening or recommend screening to others. Future studies can assess whether the Shapley value results were associated with screening retention. None
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 | 0,011 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 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 ».