Application of Conjoint Analysis to Improve Reliability of Dietician Consultation in Pediatric Celiac Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Celiac disease (CD) management involves lifelong adherence to a gluten-free diet, making the dietician a key member in CD care. However, our institution lacked a standardized process for dietary consultation in newly diagnosed CD. METHODS: fractional factorial conjoint analysis was performed. Attributes studied (2 levels each) included type of initial follow-up gastroenterology (GI) provider, interval from diagnosis to follow-up, concurrence of initial dietary consultation with gastroenterology visit, and on-going follow-up GI provider. CD care was standardized in July 2014 to facilitate concurrent visits with the clinician and dietician during the same clinical session. Changes to mean time of dietary consultation and reliability of dietary consultation were monitored using an individual-control and G-control chart, respectively. Standard control chart rules were followed. RESULTS: Conjoint analysis identified shorter time to initial follow-up visit and concurrent GI/dietician visits as more important attributes in newly diagnosed CD subjects' care. Types of follow-up provider during first or subsequent visits were identified as less important attributes. After initiation of a standardized follow-up process, a special cause was identified in December 2015 with a decrease in the mean time to dietary consultation from 30 to 20 days. In addition, standardized follow-up resulted in a more reliable process as evident by a special cause on the G-control chart in February 2015. CONCLUSION: Conjoint analysis identified attributes thought to be important in CD follow-up care. After redesign of our care process, a decrease in time to dietary consultation with improved reliability was observed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".