MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984840138 · doi:10.1177/0272989x19884541

SURE Test Accuracy for Decisional Conflict Screening among Parents Making Decisions for Their Child

2019· article· en· W2984840138 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Boland, France Légaré, Daniel I. McIsaac, Ian D. Graham, Monica Taljaard, Simon Décary, Dawn Stacey

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Decision Making · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité LavalOttawa HospitalWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsConfidence intervalMedicineInterquartile rangeTest (biology)StatisticsAnalysis of varianceInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. We aimed to validate the SURE test for use with parents in primary care. Methods. A secondary analysis of cluster randomized trial data was used to compare the SURE test (index, higher score = less conflict) to the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS; reference, higher score = greater conflict). Our a priori hypothesis was that the scales would correlate negatively. We evaluated the association between scores and estimated the proportion of variance in the DCS explained by the SURE test. Then, we dichotomized each measure using established cutoffs to calculate diagnostic accuracy and internal consistency with confidence intervals adjusted for clustering. We evaluated the presence of effect modification by sex, followed by sex-specific calculation of validation statistics. Results. In total, 185 of 201 parents completed a DCS and SURE test. Total DCS (mean = 4.2/100, SD = 14.3) and SURE test (median 4/4; interquartile range, 4–4) scores were significantly correlated (ρ = −0.36, P < 0.0001). The SURE test explained 34% of the DCS score variance. Internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson 20) was 0.38 ( P < 0.0001). SURE test sensitivity and specificity for identifying decisional conflict were 32% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%–44%) and 96% (95% CI, 93%–100%), respectively. The SURE test’s positive likelihood ratio was 8.4 (95% CI, 0.1–17) and its negative likelihood ratio was 0.7 (95% CI, 0.53–0.87). There were no significant differences between females and males in DCS ( P = 0.5) or SURE test ( P = 0.97) total scores; however, correlations between test total scores (–0.37 for females v. for –0.21 for males; P = 0.001 for the interaction) and sensitivity and specificity were higher for females than males. Conclusions. SURE test demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties for screening decisional conflict among parents making a health decision about their child in primary care. However, clinicians cannot be confident that a negative SURE test rules out the presence of decisional conflict.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Decision MakingSame topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207