MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762479965 · doi:10.1093/pch/19.6.e35-70

72: Accuracy Testing of Transcutaneous Jaundice Meters: Should Transcutaneous Jaundice Meters be Used Right Out of the Box?

2014· article· en· W2762479965 on OpenAlexaffabout
Krista Baerg, Julie Smith-Fehr, H Irwin, Martha E. Lyon

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineJaundiceMetreLinear regressionRegression analysisStatisticsSurgeryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Screening total serum (TSB) or transcutaneous (TcB) bilirubin in all infants is recommended. The JM-103 Drager Jaundice meter is approved for TcB screening in Canada. The accuracy of six TcB meters was determined by comparing meter results with the clinical laboratory TSB results. Ethical approval was obtained for this prospective observational study. Participants received the institutional standard (TSB) for bilirubin screening. Infants under 14 days of age, over 35 weeks gestation, with no history of phototherapy or transfusion were eligible. Prior to TSB collection, skin tone and sternal TcB readings were obtained. Enrolment continued until there were at least five participants, for each of six meters in each TSB range (TSB <150 μmol/L, 151 μmol/L to 250 μmol/L, and >251 μmol/L). Up to five TcB meter readings were obtained per participant. Data was analyzed using Deming regression to determine the relationship between TcB and TSB for each meter. Regression slopes for each meter were compared for statistical significance (P<0.05). Two hundred and four participants were enrolled in this study and 909 TcB meter results were obtained. The regression line for each meter is the following, Meter 1: y = 1.05x − 6.8; Meter 2: y = 0.94x − 11.4; Meter 3: y = 0.96x − 14.3; Meter 4: y = 0.88x − 10.5; Meter 5: y = 0.97x − 20.6; Meter 6: y = 0.89x − 4.3. The regression slope for Meter 1 was significantly different from meters 2–6. The regression slopes for meters 2–6 were not significantly different. At TSB = 100 umol/L, Meters 2–6 results ranged from 76 μmol/L to 81 μmol/L while Meter 1 reported 94 μmol/L. At TSB = 200 μmol/L, Meters 2–6 results ranged from 167 μmol/L to 178 μmol/L and Meter 1 reported 200 μmol/L. At TSB = μmol/L, Meters 2–6 results ranged from 304 μmol/L to 326 μmol/L while Meter 1 reported 359 μmol/L. Significantly different TcB results were obtained with meter 1 when compared with meters 2–6 results. Results obtained with meters 2–6 were not significantly different. No mathematical adjustment to an intervention nomogram can accommodate TcB readings from both Meter 1 and Meters 2–6. Correlation of new meters with the clinical laboratory TSB method is required to determine specific action thresholds before integration of meters into community screening protocols. Our study demonstrates that TcB meters may report clinically significant variant results. Furthermore, between-meter accuracy must be determined before different TcB meters are used for longitudinal clinical surveillance (trending).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicNeonatal Health and BiochemistryFrench-language works237,207