MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128434334 · doi:10.1111/acem.14226

Evaluation of bedside sonography performed by emergency physicians to detect intussusception in children in the emergency department

2021· article· en· W3128434334 on OpenAlexaff
Aude Tonson la Tour, Marie‐Pier Desjardins, Jocelyn Gravel

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntussusception (medical disorder)Emergency departmentUltrasoundFocused assessment with sonography for traumaPoint of care ultrasoundEmergency ultrasoundConfidence intervalProspective cohort studyRadiologyCohortPhysical examinationEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicineAbdominal trauma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the test characteristics of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) performed by emergency physicians with varying levels of experience among children having undergone diagnostic radiology ultrasound for intussusception in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: This was a subanalysis of a prospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary care PED. The study population was a sample of children younger than 5 years old who required an abdominal ultrasound for suspected intussusception. Participating physicians had varying levels of POCUS experience. They received a 1-hour didactic and practical training session on intussusception ultrasound. All POCUS was performed following the initial physical examination and prior to further radiologic evaluation. The final outcome was determined by radiologic evaluation performed by a pediatric radiologist. Test characteristics were calculated for POCUS compared with the criterion standard of ultrasound read by a pediatric radiologist. A secondary analysis compared test characteristics of POCUS performed by physicians with different level of POCUS training. RESULTS: A total of 131 children were evaluated by POCUS, of whom 45 (34%) had an intussusception. Twenty-four physicians performed between one and 25 POCUS procedures. POCUS identified 39 of 45 intussusception cases, with a sensitivity of 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.94). A normal or inconclusive POCUS was reported for 83 of the 86 negative studies, with a specificity of 0.97 (95% CI = 0.90 to 0.99). When excluding the 28 patients for whom the physician reported an inconclusive examination, the sensitivity improved to 0.98 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.00) and the specificity to 0.94 (95% CI = 0.85 to 0.99). The accuracy of diagnosis using POCUS was 42 of 43 (98%) for experienced sonographers in comparison to 81 of 88 (92%) for novices. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a very good sensitivity and specificity of POCUS for intussusception in children when performed by multiple emergency physicians with varying POCUS experience.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.317 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Emergency MedicineSame topicGastrointestinal disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207