Treatment Practices and Confidence in the Management of Pediatric Metabolic Bone Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pediatric metabolic bone and mineral disorders encompass a wide variety of disorders that can be challenging to diagnose and treat because of inadequate physician training about optimal management. METHODS: As practice variation and confidence levels may impact clinical outcome, we sought to assess physician confidence in managing pediatric metabolic bone and mineral disorders and the spectrum of treatment practices among members of the Pediatric Endocrine Society (PES) and the Canadian Pediatric Endocrine Group (CPEG). Questionnaires were distributed via e-mail to all members of the PES and CPEG and 244 were completed. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and proportions were compared using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate. RESULTS: Variations were observed among the respondents' confidence in the management of bone disorders and in the criteria used to initiate/discontinue intravenous bisphosphonates or prescribe burosumab therapy. Respondents felt confident with the management of 4 out of 20 pediatric bone conditions (confidence was defined as >90% of respondents reporting feeling "somewhat confident" or "very confident"). Physicians working in a bone clinic were more confident in prescribing burosumab for the treatment of X-linked hypophosphatemic rickets compared to those not working in a bone clinic (65% vs. 47%, p = 0.03). Most respondents (52%) reported having received inadequate training in pediatric metabolic bone and mineral disorders. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Dedicated training, knowledge acquisition, and education resources are needed to increase confidence and standardize the use of bone-targeted therapies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".