MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602048108 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014620

Development of the Brussels Infant and Toddler Stool Scale (‘BITSS’): protocol of the study

2017· article· en· W2602048108 on OpenAlexaff
Yvan Vandenplas, Hania Szajewska, Marc A. Benninga, Christophe Dupont, Christophe Fauré, Mohamed Miqdadi, Seksit Osatakul, Carmen Ribes-Konickx, Miguel Saps, Raanan Shamir, Annamaria Staiano

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNeonatal skin health care
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineToddlerPediatricsScale (ratio)PopulationFamily medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSS) which consists of 7 photographs of different stool forms allows assessment of stool consistency (scale 1 for hard lumps to scale 7 for watery stools), in an objective manner in adults. The BSS is also sometimes used to characterise the stools of infants and young children. Despite its use, there is general agreement among paediatric gastroenterologists that the BSS is not adequate to be used in infants and young children who wear diapers; thus, a new scale specifically designed for this population is needed. Our aim is to develop a paediatric stool scale, the Brussels Infant and Toddler Stool Scale ('BITSS'), and to evaluate the interobserver agreement of stool assessment with the BITSS between the patient's parent and healthcare providers (physicians and nurses). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study has two phases. In the first phase, 11 key-opinion leaders in the field of paediatric gastroenterology representing different areas of the world selected seven coloured photographs of infants and/or young children wearing diapers to match the original descriptors of the BSS. The selected photographs were used to create a new scale in which the drawings of stools of the BSS were replaced by infant/toddlers stool photographs. In phase II, we aim at demonstrating that parents, nurses and primary healthcare physicians interpret the stool-pictures of the BITSS with a high degree of consensus and that the agreement is independent of whether it is a parent or a healthcare provider. Interobserver variability of stool assessment with the BITSS between the patient's parent and healthcare providers will be assessed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be approved by the Ethics Committee of the participating centres. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. Abstracts will be submitted to national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02913950.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.005
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.347 · 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.

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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicNeonatal skin health careFrench-language works237,207