Direct to cystoscopy: A prospective quality assessment of patient preferences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cystourethroscopy is one of the most common procedures performed by urologists in both office and operative settings. With the recent centralization of cystoscopy at our center, we looked to assess our current delivery model, to determine whether patients prefer their initial visit to be in cystoscopy or in the clinic, followed by a cystoscopy appointment later. METHODS: We administered 500 prospective questionnaires to adults undergoing cystoscopy by 14 urologists at our center in 2017. Patient demographics were collected, along with their questionnaire results that we compared to their urologist-reported indication, results, and plan. Our primary objective was to assess whether patients prefer to be seen direct to cystoscopy (DTC) vs. a clinic appointment (CA) before cystoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 500 questionnaires were analyzed, with 336/500 (67%) patients being male. Mean age was 66 years (21-93), with 30% under 60 years. Thirty-nine percent (n=193) were undergoing their first cystoscopy, with 85% preferring DTC. There was no difference in age, gender, first-time cystoscopy, or indication for cystoscopy when comparing those who preferred DTC vs. CA. Patients who had an accurate understanding of the indication for their cystoscopy had 6.23 times higher odds of preferring DTC (p<0.05). We also identified a deficiency in patient comprehension of cystoscopy results and followup plans. CONCLUSIONS: With limited health resources, a large patient catchment area, and the majority of patients preferring to be seen DTC, there is evidence to implement a default DTC approach to booking cystoscopy clinics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".