P134 Home based faecal calprotectin testing: a Canadian user performance evaluation study of IBDoc®
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Fecal Calprotectin (FC) is a stool biomarker that has previously been shown to be sensitive and specific for mucosal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The test is limited by the requirement for patients to collect and return stool samples. A previous study showed a sample return rate of 78%. The objective was to determine the usability of IBDoc®, a home based FC test, designed to allow patients to independently determine their FC levels without the need to return a stool sample to a laboratory or doctor’s office and thereby improve test adherence. Patients were prospectively enrolled from three sites across Canada between May to August, 2017. Patients were given a demonstration at the clinic on how to use the IBDoc® prior to performing the test. Patients brought their stool sample to the site to perform one IBDoc® test. Three extracts from the same stool sample were prepared by the study coordinators and sent to a central laboratory site for a comparative reference ELISA measurements. Additionally, the extracts prepared by the patients were also measured by ELISA. Patient values were compared with an average value from three ELISA measurements as well as the IBDoc® categorical values of normal (<100 µg/g), moderate (100–299 µg/g), or high (>300 µg/g). A self-reported patient questionnaire using 5-point Likert scales (1 = “strongly disagree”, 5 = “strongly agree”) was used to determine ease-of-use of the IBDoc® device. 61 participants were enrolled in the study of which 34% (21) were male with an average age of 34.8 ± 9.0 years. 51 patients had both IBDoc® and ELISA measurements available for comparison, resulting in agreement across values 88% of the time and which was highly correlated (r = 0.88). Using the qualitative comparison, there were no false positives or negatives. The patients extracts and reference ELISA measurements demonstrated an 89% agreement between values, which was also highly correlated (r =0.97) and with no false positives or negatives in the qualitative comparison. Ninety-seven per cent (59/61) positively responded that they had understood the instruction in the App. 79% (48/61) of patients agreed that the IBDoc® was easy to use with 85% (52/61) of patients strongly agreeing that they were willing use the home kit in the future and an average rating of 4.5 ± 0.89. The FC measurements produced by patients using the IBDoc® were strongly correlated with the standard FC ELISA measurements. The majority of patients found the IBDoc® home kit easy to use and a product that they would likely to use in the future. Further studies are needed to determine whether patients adopt the device for use beyond the clinical trial setting and to assess its impact on patient care for IBD.
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 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 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 ».