Variation in the Diagnosis and Management of Appendicitis at Canadian Pediatric Hospitals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective was to characterize the variations in practice in the diagnosis and management of children admitted to hospitals from Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs) with suspected appendicitis, specifically the timing of surgical intervention, ED investigations, and management strategies. METHODS: Twelve sites participated in this retrospective health record review. Children aged 3 to 17 years admitted to the hospital with suspected appendicitis were eligible. Site-specific demographics, investigations, and interventions performed were recorded and compared. Factors associated with after-hours surgery were determined using generalized estimating equations logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 619 children meeting eligibility criteria, surgical intervention was performed in 547 (88%). After-hours surgery occurred in 76 of the 547 children, with significant variation across sites (13.9%, 95% confidence interval = 7.1% to 21.6%, p < 0.001). The overall perforation rate was 17.4% (95 of 547), and the negative appendectomy rate was 6.8% (37 of 547), varying across sites (p = 0.004 and p = 0.036, respectively). Use of inflammatory markers (p < 0.001), blood cultures (p < 0.001), ultrasound (p = 0.001), and computed tomography (p = 0.001) also varied by site. ED administration of narcotic analgesia and antibiotics varied across sites (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively), as did the type of surgical approach (p < 0.001). After-hours triage had a significant inverse association with after-hours surgery (p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Across Canadian pediatric EDs, there exists significant variation in the diagnosis and management of children with suspected appendicitis. These results indicate that the best diagnostic and management strategies remain unclear and support the need for future prospective, multicenter studies to identify strategies associated with optimal patient outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".