The fecal immunochemical test (fit): Selected aspects regarding its effectiveness for colorectal cancer screening in Quebec City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: FIT's value has been ascertained across Canada and worldwide, but still needs to be assessed within the province of Quebec. There also remains a gap between formal indications for FIT, and its actual use in clinical practice. This research aims to evaluate some aspects of FIT's effectiveness in our setting, and its application by prescribers. METHODS: We retrospectively identified and reviewed all the colonoscopies conducted for a positive FIT in 2014 at 2 hospitals located in Quebec City. RESULTS: Five hundred and fifty-nine (559) colonoscopies were reviewed. We obtained PPVs of 6.8% and 46.9% for the detection of CRC and AA, respectively. The PPV for the detection of SCL was higher in men compared to women (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.11-2.20) and among justified FITs compared to unwarranted ones (OR 1.88, 95%CI 1.34-2.63). The PPV for CRC detection was 25.0% in the presence of unexplained iron deficiency anemia and 6.5% when anemia was absent (p = 0.0058). In 49.9% of cases, the prescription of a FIT was inappropriate. CONCLUSION: The FIT holds a better PPV for detecting SCL among men and when it is indicated. Anemia is associated with a higher CRC detection rate. Half of the FITs were not initially indicated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".