A25 MEASURING THE OBSERVER (HAWTHORNE) EFFECT ON ADENOMA DETECTION RATES: A CASE-CONTROL RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The effectiveness of colonoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) is directly linked to its procedural quality. An independent observer (Hawthorne effect) can improve colonoscopy procedural quality metrics, including adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, the results of studies are limited or controversial. Purpose We aimed to evaluate the colonoscopy quality metrics in a group of patients undergoing screening or diagnostic colonoscopies under stringent observer conditions. Method In a single-center, case–control study, consecutive patients undergoing routine screening or diagnostic colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled. In the case group, all procedural steps and quality metrics were observed and documented, and the procedure was video recorded by an independent research assistant. In the control group, colonoscopies were performed without independent observation. Colonoscopy quality metrics such as polyp, adenoma, serrated lesions, and advanced adenoma detection rates (PDR, ADR, SLDR, AADR), the mean number of adenomas detected per patient (MAP), and the mean number of adenomas and serrated lesions detected per patient (MASP) were compared. The probabilities of increased quality metrics were evaluated through regression analyses weighted by the inversed probability of observation during the procedure. Result(s) We included a total of 687 patients (327 cases and 360 controls) in the final analyses. The case group had significantly higher PDRs (62.4% vs. 53.1%) and ADRs (39.4% vs. 28.3%) compared with the control group. The SLDR was also higher in the case group than in the control group, but the difference was not significant (7.3% vs. 4.4%; P = 0.14). The AADR was not significantly increased. After adjusting for potential confounders, the ADR and SLDR were 50% (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95%CI 1.05–2.17) and more than twofold (OR 2.17; 95%CI 1.05–4.47) more likely to be higher in the case group than in the control group. The MAP and MASP were significantly increased in the case group compared with the control group (P < 0.001). The regression analyses for both metrics demonstrated the direct and significant association between the Hawthorne effect and elevated MAP/MASP. Conclusion(s) The presence of an independent observer documenting colonoscopy quality metrics and video recording the colonoscopy resulted in a significant increase in ADR and other quality metrics. The Hawthorne effect should be considered an alternative strategy to advanced devices to improve colonoscopy quality in routine practice. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest M. Taghiakbari: None Declared, D. Coman: None Declared, M. Takla: None Declared, A. N. Barkun: None Declared, M. Frija-Gruman: None Declared, M. Bouin: None Declared, S. Bouchard: None Declared, E. Deslandres: None Declared, S. Sidani: None Declared, D. von Renteln Grant / Research support from: ERBE, Ventage, Pendopharm, and Pentax, Consultant of: Boston Scientific and Pendopharm
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 | 0,006 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 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 ».