MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762630779 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxx086.101

INVESTIGATING THE ACCURACY OF AN UPGRADED TRANSCUTANEOUS BILIRUBIN SCREENING TOOL BY SITE OF TESTING

2017· article· en· W2762630779 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thivia Jegathesan, Douglas M. Campbell, Mary Debono, V Shah, Jennifer Twiss, Michael Sgro

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHamilton Health SciencesHealth Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineForeheadGestational ageBilirubinProspective cohort studyLimits of agreementCoefficient of variationPediatricsNuclear medicineSurgeryGastroenterologyChromatographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe neonatal hyperbilirubinemia continues to occur in healthy term infants. The incidence has decreased as a result of guidelines by the Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), requiring all healthy newborns to receive either a transcutaneous bilirubin (TCB) or total serum bilirubin (TSB) at discharge. Several studies have investigated the effectiveness of TCB tools. However, discrepancies still exist on the agreement between TCB and TSB by site and treatment. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy and agreement of TCB and TSB by site and treatment using the JM-105. DESIGN/METHODS: A multi-site prospective clinical trial of term infants requiring TSB measurements. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to determine the accuracy between TSB and TCB measurements by site and treatment. Bland-Altman Plots of the agreement between TSB and TCB values by site and treatment were generated. RESULTS: Paired TSB and TCB measurements from the forehead and sternum were collected from 75 term infants between 36-44 weeks gestational age. Bland-Altman Plots by site demonstrated the mean difference between TSB and TCB on the forehead to be -1.72 μmol/L ± 24.64 μmol/L (-66.7 μmol/L to 49.00 μmol/L) and sternum to be 1.2 μmol/L ± 37.99 μmol/L (-82.00. μmol/L to 136.33 μmol/L). The mean TSB level was 131.43 μmol/L ± 54.88 μmol/L (31 μmol/L – 285 μmol/L), mean TCB level on the forehead was 132.40 μmol/L ±57.029 μmol/L,(19 μmol/L-284.5 μmol/L) and mean TCB level on the sternum was 121.32 μmol/L ±58.27 μmol/L, (13.5 μmol/L-261.6 μmol/L). Paired t-tests revealed no significant mean differences between TCB and TSB measurements by site and treatment. The correlation between the TSB and TCB values from the forehead (Pearson’s correlation r =0.877, p<0.01) were higher than the correlation between TSB and TCB values from the sternum (r= 0.646, p<0.01). The correlation between TSB and TCB values on the forehead (r=0.879, p<0.01) and sternum (r=0.747, p<0.01) were higher prior to phototherapy. The mean difference between TSB and TCB after phototherapy on the forehead was 25.77 μmol/L ± 48.36 μmol/L and sternum was 95.69 μmol/L ± 73.72 μmol/L. CONCLUSION: The JM-105 is an accurate TCB screening tool for physicians to use in healthy newborns by site. After the initiation of phototherapy the forehead may be a more appropriate site of measure with an overestimate of bilirubin levels. Additional research is required to obtain a greater understanding of the impact of phototherapy and site on TCB screening tools.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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