MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324331434 · doi:10.1097/mpg.0000000000000686

The Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool for Pediatric Colonoscopy

2015· article· en· W2324331434 on OpenAlexaff
Catharine M. Walsh, Simon C. Ling, Petar Mamula, Jenifer R. Lightdale, Thomas D. Walters, Jeffrey Yu, Heather Carnahan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandSickKids FoundationThe Wilson CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyIntraclass correlationInter-rater reliabilityIntubationEndoscopyRating scaleInternal medicinePsychometricsSurgeryColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Validated assessment tools are required to support competency-based education. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Competency Assessment Tool for Pediatric Colonoscopy (GiECATKIDS), an instrument developed by 41 North American experts using Delphi methodology. METHODS: GiECATKIDS consists of a 7-item global rating scale (GRS) and an 18-item checklist (CL). An attending physician assessed 104 colonoscopies performed at 3 North American hospitals by 56 endoscopists, including 25 novices (<50 previous procedures), 21 intermediates (50-250), and 10 advanced endoscopists (>500). Another observer rated procedures to assess interrater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Test-retest reliability was measured with ICC comparing endoscopists' first and second procedure scores. Discriminative validity was examined by comparing experience level with scores. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating scores with colonoscopy experience, cecal and terminal ileal intubation rates, and physician global assessment. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of the GiECATKIDS was high (total: ICC = 0.88; GRS: ICC = 0.79; CL: ICC = 0.89). Test-retest reliability was excellent (total: ICC = 0.94; GRS: ICC = 0.94; CL: ICC = 0.84). GiECATKIDS total, GRS, and CL scores differed significantly among novice, intermediate, and advanced endoscopists (P < 0.001). There was a significant positive correlation (P < 0.001) between scores and number of previous colonoscopies (total: ρ = 0.91, GRS: ρ = 0.92, CL: ρ = 0.84), cecal intubation rate (total: ρ = 0.82, GRS: ρ = 0.85, CL: ρ = 0.77), ileal intubation rate (total: ρ = 0.82, GRS: ρ = 0.82, CL: ρ = 0.80), and physician global assessment (total: ρ = 0.95, GRS: ρ = 0.94, CL: ρ = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The GiECATKIDS demonstrates strong reliability and validity as a measure of performance of pediatric colonoscopy that can be used to support training and assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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