MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048721551 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200004

Quality of ultrasonography reporting and factors associated with selection of imaging modality for uterine fibroids in Canada: results from a prospective cohort registry

2020· article· en· W3048721551 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Olga Bougie, Mohamed A. Bedaiwy, Philippe Y. Laberge, Gerald Lebovic, Nicholas Leyland, Mostafa Atri, Ally Murji

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Michael's HospitalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalMount Sinai Hospital
FundersAllergan
KeywordsModality (human–computer interaction)MedicineCohortUltrasonographyUterine fibroidsProspective cohort studyTransvaginal ultrasonographyObstetricsGynecologyRadiologyInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Uterine fibroids are common in women and their management is heavily influenced by information gathered through imaging. We aimed to evaluate the type and quality of imaging performed for assessment of uterine fibroids in Canada. <h3>Methods:</h3> Starting in July 2015, premenopausal women with symptomatic fibroids were enrolled in a prospective, noninterventional, observational registry (Canadian Women With Uterine Fibroids Registry [CAPTURE]) that included 19 Canadian sites. Clinical characteristics were extracted from the baseline visit. We evaluated the association between demographic and clinical variables of interest with regard to imaging type using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. <h3>Results:</h3> Of 1493 women, 1148 had ultrasonography, 135 had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 80 had other types of imaging and 130 did not have imaging reported within 12 months of the baseline visit. After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, patients who underwent MRI had larger fibroids (odds ratio [OR] per 1-cm increase 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–1.17) and more numerous fibroids (1 v. &gt; 1; OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.14–2.64) compared with those who underwent ultrasonography only. For ultrasonography reporting, quality criteria were met for 268 of 1148 patients (23.3%). There was a difference in the quality of reporting among the 19 sites (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Logistic regression model accounting for within-site variability showed that reporting results from ultrasonography in the province of Quebec were less likely to meet all quality criteria (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06–0.66) and those from sites in more populated cities (≥ 400 000 inhabitants) were more likely to do so (OR 6.15, 95% CI 2.20–17.18). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> We determined that imaging modality for fibroids is associated with patient characteristics. The quality of reporting results for ultrasonography of fibroids in Canada falls short of internationally endorsed guidelines and needs improvement. <h3>Study registration:</h3> ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02580578

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207