MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200437319 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znab429.006

O-BN01 The para-oesophageal hernia symptom tool (post): A modified delphi consensus study

2021· article· en· W4200437319 on OpenAlexaff
Aiysha Puri, Nikhil Patel, Viknesh Sounderajah, Lorenzo Ferri, Ewen A. Griffiths, Donald E. Low, Nick Maynard, Carmen Mueller, Manuel Pera, Mark I. van Berge Henegouwen, David I. Watson, Giovanni Zaninotto, George B. Hanna, Sheraz R. Markar

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDelphi methodQuality of life (healthcare)Likert scaleNominal group techniqueIntervention (counseling)Inclusion (mineral)DelphiPhysical therapyFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with a para-oesophageal hernia (POH) report a complex range of symptoms and quality of life (QOL) issues. Clinicians often utilise existing health related quality of life tools to (1) identify patients who are eligible for surgical management and (2) to evaluate the benefit of surgical intervention. However, the most commonly used tools for this purpose are not disease specific. As such, crucial POH specific symptoms which impact QOL may not be captured. In order to address this issue, a modified Delphi consensus study was undertaken to establish a HRQOL instrument specific to POH. Methods A two-round modified Delphi consensus study was conducted with a group of international experts. Participants were identified through (1) their authorship in landmark POH studies and (2) the professional networks of the study investigators. Prior to the Delphi process, a scoping survey was undertaken in order to generate a list of candidate items. Participants were asked to rate the items’ importance in assessing patients with POH using a 5-point Likert scale. The a priori threshold for inclusion was 80% for scores of 4 or 5. If consensus was not achieved, the item was carried through to the next round. Results The candidate list of items consisted of 64 symptoms, refined to 20 for inclusion within the first modified Delphi round. Four symptoms; ‘difficulty getting solid foods down’, ‘chest pain after meals’, ‘difficulty getting liquids down’ and ‘shortness of breath only after meals’, reached consensus threshold of 80% in the first round and one additional symptom, ‘early feeling of fullness after eating’, reached consensus in the second. A total of 26 participants took part in the first and 24 in the second round. These five symptoms have been identified to form the initial version of the Para-Oesophageal Hernia Symptom Tool (POST). Conclusions POST is the first tool that aims to capture POH-specific symptoms that impact upon HRQOL. Prior to clinical use, this tool will be presented in international patient workshops to assess its construct validity. Following this, we aim to assess the content validity of the tool through a longitudinal study in a cohort of patients with POH who are undergoing repair. We hope that this tool will serve as a decision support tool for clinicians who are evaluating the risk-benefit of surgical intervention in this cohort of patients.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207