MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2789858816 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.228

A228 GASTROENTEROLOGISTS DIFFER IN THEIR PREFERRED MODE OF DELIVERY FOR PREGNANT WOMEN WITH ILEAL ANAL-POUCH ANASTOMOSIS

2018· article· en· W2789858816 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Ellen Kuenzig, M. Mathivanan, Cynthia H. Seow, Eric I. Benchimol, Remo Panaccione, Anthony R. MacLean, Maitreyi Raman, Yvette Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpecialtyUlcerative colitisAnastomosisFamilial adenomatous polyposisPouchitisPouchGeneral surgeryInternal medicineFamily medicineSurgeryColorectal cancerDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is common among individuals with medically-refractory ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis syndrome and is often performed during patients’ reproductive years. Female infertility is common after IPAA but is decreased with laparoscopic procedures. Clinical practice guidelines recommend caesarean(C-) section but are based on little evidence. Determine recommendations given to pregnant women with IPAA by their gastroenterologist with regard to mode of delivery. Canadian gastroenterologists (GIs) were surveyed through the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology in May 2014. The questionnaire included demographic and clinical practice characteristics, and queried GIs on recommendations made to women with IPAA using a clinical vignette. We assessed physician characteristics associated with providing recommendations using a Fisher’s exact test (categorical variables) and Wilcoxon rank-sum test (duration of clinical practice). 57 gastroenterologists responded and had practiced for a median of 9 years (IQR 15). Two-thirds (38/56; 68%) of GIs practiced in an academic centre. Most GIs regularly (29/54; 54%) or sometimes (14/54; 20%) recommended a mode of delivery to women with IPAA of childbearing age. Physicians with ≥200 IBD patients in their practice and ≥10 patients with an IPAA were more likely to provide recommendations (p<0.05 for both; Table). Among gastroenterologists providing recommendations, 14/40 (35%) would recommend a trial of labour with a low threshold for C-section; 5/40 (13%), elective C-section; and 4/40 (10%), spontaneous vaginal delivery. The remaining physicians would defer to another specialty or patient preference. While the majority of gastroenterologists recommend a specific mode of delivery to their female patients of childbearing age with an IPAA, their recommendations are heterogeneous. This differs from the clinical practice guidelines on IBD in pregnancy, which recommend C-section in women with IPAA. Additional research is needed to identify the safest mode of delivery for these women and to assess uptake of these guidelines. Characteristics of GIs recommending a mode of delivery to women with IPAA *p<0.05 CAG, CCC, CIHR

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→