Ottawa Score of 8 or Greater Is an Optimal Cut-off Point for Inadequate Bowel Preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Bowel preparation (BP) quality is defined to be technically inadequate if the endoscopist cannot detect with confidence polyps > 5 mm. The optimal cut-off point for the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale for inadequate bowel preparation is currently not established. The objective of our study was to determine the optimal cut-off point for the Ottawa score for inadequate bowel preparation quality. Methods: We prospectively collected data on 222 outpatients undergoing diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopy at Los Angeles County-University of Southern California from January to April 2010. Patients with incomplete Ottawa scores were excluded from analysis. We collected data on patient demographics, medical history, procedural information, and bowel preparation quality. All patients received a polyethylene glycol-based split-dose bowel preparation regimen. The 4-point visual BP quality score (poor/fair/good/excellent) as described in the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative software (CORI version 4) and the Ottawa score (range 0 to 14) were analyzed using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The visual BP quality score was dichotomized as “Poor” which indicates inability to detect polyps > 5 mm or “Not Poor.” The sensitivity and specificity of each Ottawa score was derived and the ROC curve was generated to assess the best cut-off point for inadequate bowel preparation. Results: Of the 222 patients, 11 had incomplete Ottawa scores and were excluded. Of the remaining 211 patients, 11 had poor visual BP quality score. The ROC analysis showed that the best cut-off point for the Ottawa score for inadequate BP quality was ≥ 8. The sensitivity was 100% and the specificity was 91%. Conclusion: The Ottawa score can be used in clinical practice to identify inadequate bowel preparation. Strong consideration should be given to repeat a colonoscopy due to inadequate bowel preparation quality when an Ottawa score of ≥8 is encountered. This finding should be validated in larger studies and in different patient care settings.Table
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".