A109 PATIENTS’ DESCRIPTIONS OF THEIR LAST BOWEL MOVEMENT BEFORE COLONOSCOPY CORRELATES STRONGLY WITH THEIR BOSTON BOWEL PREPARATION SCALE (BBPS) SCORE WHEN ASSESSED USING A STANDARDIZED METHOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Predicting bowel prep quality prior to colonoscopy may help improve colonoscopy prep quality by instituting adjunct measures before colonoscopy. This will in turn reduce repeat procedures, complications, and costs. Aims We determined the utility of a standardized method to obtain information from patients on the characteristics of their last bowel movement before colonoscopy by correlating the obtained information to BBPS. We compared this approach to informal/usual descriptions attained by nurses. Methods This is a cross-sectional study with data collected at two tertiary care hospitals. On the day of their colonoscopy, outpatients were asked by an assistant to describe their last bowel movement using a standardized method. The same patients had previously been asked by endoscopy nurses to describe their last bowel movement; the assistant was blind to previous descriptions. Descriptions were assigned a score (Table 1). Following colonoscopy, total and segmental BBPS scores were recorded by the gastroenterologist performing the procedure; the gastroenterologist was blind to the descriptions. Bivariate Pearson’s Correlation was used to separately assess the correlation between descriptions and BBPS. Cohen’s Kappa was used to assess agreement between the two descriptions. Results 121 patients (ages 17–86; 55% Female) with 11% BBPS< 6 were included. For descriptions attained by the assistant, there was a strong correlation with total BBPS score (r = 0.738; p < 0.001); correlation to segmental BBPS was moderate-to-strong (r=0.70, 0.63 and 0.67 right, transverse and left colon respectively). For descriptions attained by endoscopy nurses, there was a moderate correlation with total BBPS score (r = 0.525; p < 0.001); correlation to segmental BBPS was weak-to-moderate (r=0.52, 0.49 and 0.44 right, transverse and left colon respectively). There was weak agreement (K = 0.525) between description attained by assistant and nurses. Conclusions When asked using a standardized method, a patient’s description of their last bowel movement correlates strongly with their total and segmental BBPS score; the correlation is weaker for non-standardized descriptions attained by endoscopy nurses. A standardized questionnaire, including assessing consistency, is valuable in assessing the bowel movement before colonoscopy. Funding Agencies None
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".