MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964210470 · doi:10.1097/mpg.0b013e3181565e3c

Design of Predictive Models for Positive Outcomes of Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopies in Children and Adolescents

2008· article· en· W1964210470 on OpenAlexaff
Angela Noble, Éric Drouin, Robyn Tamblyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopyReceiver operating characteristicHypoalbuminemiaLogistic regressionPredictive value of testsProspective cohort studyEsophagogastroduodenoscopyRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To develop models to accurately determine the outcomes of diagnostic endoscopies performed in children and adolescents without known gastrointestinal disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective chart review of all endoscopies performed in children 2 to 18 years of age without known gastrointestinal disease from January 1 to December 31, 2000. The association between age, presenting symptoms, physical examination findings, laboratory investigations, and endoscopy outcomes was assessed. Predictive models for positive outcomes on endoscopy were estimated for upper and lower endoscopies separately by use of multiple logistic regression. Receiver operating curves were constructed to evaluate the performance of the models. A model with a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 40% was considered clinically significant. RESULTS: Positive findings on endoscopy were found in 191 (55%) of 346 and in 120 (59%) of 204 upper and lower endoscopies, respectively. Age above 13 years, vomiting, and hypoalbuminemia were significant predictors of positive upper endoscopies. Rectal bleeding, hypoalbuminemia, and elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate were significant predictors of positive lower endoscopies. Extrapolating from the receiver operating curves, a sensitivity of 95% corresponded to a specificity of 10% for the upper endoscopy model and 30% for the lower endoscopy model. CONCLUSIONS: In our population of children and adolescents, several clinical characteristics were predictive of positive upper and lower endoscopy outcomes. Predictive models composed of these clinical variables were statistically, but not clinically, significant. The inclusion of additional clinical characteristics that could be assessed in prospective studies will likely improve the clinical significance of endoscopy outcome prediction.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207