MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

838 Quality Assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

2019· article· en· W2979527143 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diego Hidalgo, Camila Montesinos‐Guevara, Camila Escobar, A. Viteri, Juan Víctor Ariel Franco, Daniel Simancas‐Racines, Jessica Hidalgo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseaseUlcerative colitisCINAHLInternal medicineMEDLINEDiseaseInflammatory Bowel DiseasesGastroenterologyMedical recordPhysical therapyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprises Crohn's Disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC), which are chronic disorders characterized by inflammation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. IBD is caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors and a deregulated immune system. While UC comprises a diffuse mucosal inflammation of the large bowel, CD presents as a patchy and transmural inflammation. The severity of IBD varies over time and urgent medical care is required when complications arise. Thus, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for IBD diagnosis and treatment have been created and updated over time. To our knowledge, only one study has assessed CPGs' quality for IBD, which were published in Japanese. The aim of this revision is to evaluate current CPGs for IBD diagnosis and treatment so healthcare professionals and patients can benefit from it. METHODS: We performed a systematic search in databases including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Lilacs, NICE, SIGN, ACG, AGA, Portuguese Gastroenterology Society, and Australian Gastroenterology Society. Two reviewers were calibrated for the inclusion of CPGs by screening the same 25% of total records by title and abstract (Tiab), the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) between reviewers was 0.7. The remaining 75% of total records was divided between the two reviewers, who independently assessed them. A similar process was performed for full-text assessment obtaining an ICC of 0.8. If reviewers disagreed, a third reviewer was involved and conflicts were solved by discussion. The authors using the AGREE II tool will evaluate all included CPGs. RESULTS: 5134 records were retrieved and 5042 remained after de-duplication. 106 records were included after Tiab screening for full-text assessment and 16 CPGs were included for data extraction. According to the data obtained from the 16 included CPGs, they were published in English, Spanish, Japanese, German and Korean. 6 CPGs were focused on UC alone, 7 were focused on CD, and 3 addressed IBD. Moreover, the 16 CPGs were developed in Israel (4), Germany (1), Japan (1), Mexico (2), Canada (1), USA (2), South Korea (1) UK (1), Spain (1), and Multiple countries (2). CPGs' developers include: Professional Association/Society (7), University (3), Government (1), and International Organization (5). CONCLUSION: This evaluation of 16 CPGs for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD contributes to a better understanding of the quality of evidence-based clinical recommendations.

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)0.215
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.531
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2150.531
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0320.033
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.279
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicClinical practice guidelines implementation→French-language works237,207→