A248 INDICATIONS FOR COLONOSCOPY PRE- AND POST-COLON SCREENING PROGRAM AT ST. PAUL’S HOSPITAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a commonly diagnosed cancer with a lifetime prevalence of 4.5%. The removal of adenomas as well as the detection and resection of early CRC have been shown to reduce the incidence and mortality of CRC. The Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care recommends utilizing fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) every 2 years in men and women between the ages of 50–74. In addition, the routine use of colonoscopy for CRC screening is not recommended. In November 2013, the Colon Screening Program (CSP) was implemented with the goal of standardizing British Columbia’s CRC screening strategy. Prior to this, no provincial strategy existed and significant variation existed with regards to the indication for colonoscopy. The purpose of this study is to investigate how the implementation of the CSP in BC has changed the indications for colonoscopy amongst newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer. A retrospective chart review of all CRC diagnosed at St. Paul’s Hospital from 2010–2015 was conducted. The list of all CRC was obtained through the St. Paul’s Hospital Department of Pathology after ethics approval. After the implementation of the CSP, a lesser proportion of patients were diagnosed with CRC via symptoms (42% vs 57%, p=0.002) or primary colonoscopy (0.6% vs 4%, p=0.038). A greater proportion of patients were diagnosed via positive FIT + FOBT (48% vs 34%, p<0.001) and surveillance colonoscopy (6% vs 3%, p=0.03). In addition, a greater proportion were diagnosed by FIT (47% vs. 22%, p<0.001) and a lesser proportion diagnosed by FOBT (1% vs 11%, p<0.001) when compared to pre-CSP era. Implementation of the CSP has led to a greater proportion of colorectal cancers being diagnosed by FIT screening and surveillance colonoscopy as well as an overall reduction in colorectal cancer being diagnosed via symptoms or primary colonoscopy. The data also suggests that family physicians in BC are almost universally favouring FIT testing over the guaiac based FOBT. These results support that the CSP has been successful in aligning the indications for colonoscopy with the recommendations made by the Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care. INDICATIONS FOR COLONOSCOPY PRE- AND POST-CSP St. Paul’s Hospital GI Research Institute
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".