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 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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.024

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 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
GenreProtocol

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