MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283066512 · doi:10.3171/2022.5.peds22116

Hydrocephalus surveillance following CSF diversion: a modified Delphi study

2022· article· en· W4283066512 on OpenAlexaff
David S. Hersh, Jonathan E. Martin, Ruth E. Bristol, Samuel R. Browd, Gerald A. Grant, Nalin Gupta, Todd C. Hankinson, Eric M. Jackson, John R. W. Kestle, Mark D. Krieger, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Casey Madura, Jonathan Pindrik, Ian F. Pollack, Jeffrey S. Raskin, Jay Riva-Cambrin, Curtis J. Rozzelle, Jodi L. Smith, John C. Wellons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLikert scaleDelphi methodHydrocephalusNeuroradiologyEndoscopic third ventriculostomyMedical physicsSurgeryPsychologyPsychiatryNeurologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Long-term follow-up is often recommended for patients with hydrocephalus, but the frequency of clinical follow-up, timing and modality of imaging, and duration of surveillance have not been clearly defined. Here, the authors used the modified Delphi method to identify areas of consensus regarding the modality, frequency, and duration of hydrocephalus surveillance following surgical treatment. METHODS: Pediatric neurosurgeons serving as institutional liaisons to the Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network (HCRN), or its implementation/quality improvement arm (HCRNq), were invited to participate in this modified Delphi study. Thirty-seven consensus statements were generated and distributed via an anonymous electronic survey, with responses structured as a 4-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree). A subsequent, virtual meeting offered the opportunity for open discussion and modification of the statements in an effort to reach consensus (defined as ≥ 80% agreement or disagreement). RESULTS: Nineteen pediatric neurosurgeons participated in the first round, after which 15 statements reached consensus. During the second round, 14 participants met virtually for review and discussion. Some statements were modified and 2 statements were combined, resulting in a total of 36 statements. At the conclusion of the session, consensus was achieved for 17 statements regarding the following: 1) the role of standardization; 2) preferred imaging modalities; 3) postoperative follow-up after shunt surgery (subdivided into immediate postoperative imaging, delayed postoperative imaging, routine clinical surveillance, and routine radiological surveillance); and 4) postoperative follow-up after an endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Consensus could not be achieved for 19 statements. CONCLUSIONS: Using the modified Delphi method, 17 consensus statements were developed with respect to both clinical and radiological follow-up after a shunt or endoscopic third ventriculostomy. The frequency, modality, and duration of surveillance were addressed, highlighting areas in which no clear data exist to guide clinical practice. Although further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of hydrocephalus surveillance, the current study provides a framework to guide future efforts to develop standardized clinical protocols for the postoperative surveillance of patients with hydrocephalus. Ultimately, the standardization of hydrocephalus surveillance has the potential to improve patient care as well as optimize the use of healthcare resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.097
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0970.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207