P681 Assessing internet based information used to aid patient decision making in surgery for perianal Crohn's fistula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Decision making in surgery for patients with perianal Crohn's fistula (pCD) is complex. There is often more than one treatment choice, which may be modified by patient treatment preferences. Patients are increasingly using the internet to find out more information about different surgical options. The purpose of this study was to assess the online information and patient decision aids relating to surgery for pCD. Methods: A systematic review of patient decision aids was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidance and registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42016046689). The Google search engine and the Decision Aids Library Inventory (DALI) were searched using a predefined search strategy. Sources that were patient focussed and provided information about pCD surgery were included in the analysis. Academic literature, and sources not in English were excluded. Source descriptors including URL, title and purpose, country of origin and upload source were noted. The quality of source content to aid patient decision making was assessed using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) and DISCERN criteria. The IPDAS and DISCERN scores reflect the usefulness of a source in aiding patient decision making; the higher the score, the better. The readability of the source content was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid score. Results: The initial search yielded 210 sources. We excluded 125 sources at screening and a further 56 at full-text review, leaving 20 sources for analysis. The majority of sources originated from the UK (n=11), the remainder being from the USA (n=8) and Canada (n=1). The most common upload source was hospital/speciality association (n=7). The mean IPDAS and DISCERN score was 6.4±1.957 out of 12 (range=3–10) and 2.9±0.718 out of 5 (range=2–4) respectively. The mean reading ease was 46.5±1.566 (U.S. college standard). Nine sources mentioned more than three surgical options to treat pCD. Perianal Crohn's disease was the main focus of seven sources, with the remainder encompassing both pCD and cryptoglandular fistula disease. Conclusions: The online sources providing information for surgery in pCD are few and their quality poor, as reflected in a low IPDAS and DISCERN score. This is due to a lack of key information and a high readability score, making the sources unhelpful and difficult to understand for patients when making a treatment choice. Health care professionals should recognise that online information for surgical management in pCD may be misleading. There is a responsibility of individual professionals and their societies to produce a patient friendly decision aid to assist patients when making their surgical treatment choices for pCD.
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 | 0.024 | 0.192 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.032 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.003 |
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".