MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980112583 · doi:10.1111/coa.13458

Shared decision‐making in older children and parents considering elective adenotonsillectomy

2019· article· en· W2980112583 on OpenAlexafffund
Amanda I. MacDonald, Jill Chorney, Michael Bezuhly, Paul Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Otolaryngology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineTonsillectomyOtorhinolaryngologyAdenoidectomyFamily medicineProspective cohort studyPediatricsPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision-making describes a collaborative process in which healthcare providers and patients/families make treatment decisions using the best available evidence, while taking into account the patient's values and preferences. The objectives of this study were to assess the level of decisional conflict and shared decision-making experienced by older children and their parents when considering elective adentonsillectomies. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Paediatric otolaryngology clinic in a teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 53 children older than 9 years and their parents who underwent consultation for tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Children and parents completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Patient Version (SDM-Q-9). Surgeons completed the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc). RESULTS: Overall, 10 (19%) parents and 18 (34%) children reported clinically significant decisional conflict. Parents who opted not to proceed with surgery had significantly higher DCS scores than those who decided to proceed with surgery. Both parents and children SDM-Q-9 and total DCS scores were significantly negatively correlated. Physician SDM-Q-Doc and parent total DCS scores were negatively correlated, while parent and physician SDM scores were positively correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Many older children and parents reported significant decisional conflict when considering elective paediatric otolaryngology surgery. Decisional conflict levels for both children and parents decreased with greater perceived levels of shared decision-making. Older children did not appear to discern the same levels of shared decision-making as parents and surgeons. Future research should assess methods to implement shared decision-making into clinical practice for clinicians, parents and children when appropriate.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.338 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical OtolaryngologySame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207