MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283164803 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2022-bsg.183

P127 Optical diagnosis training to improve dysplasia characterisation in inflammatory bowel disease (OPTIC-IBD): a multicentre RCT

2022· article· en· W4283164803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M Iacucci, RJM Ingram, A Bazarova, R Cannatelli, N Labarile, O Nardone, T Parigi, K Siau, S Smith, S Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster presentations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysplasiaInflammatory bowel diseaseRandomized controlled trialColonoscopyClinical endpointPhysical therapyInternal medicineDiseaseColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Endoscopic surveillance is performed in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) to detect dysplasia. However, chronic inflammation alters mucosal and vascular colonic architecture, complicating lesion recognition. Optical diagnosis enhances our ability to accurately characterise IBD-associated dysplasia but such training is not readily available. We aim to fill this gap by developing and validating the new OPTIC-IBD online training platform (NCT04924543, funding GutsUK TRN2019-03). <h3>Methods</h3> We designed an interactive, self-directed, multi-modality learning module. This includes surveillance principles, optical diagnosis methods, characterisation approach, classifications (SCENIC, Kudo, FACILE), examples and self-assessments. We invited participants from Canada, Italy and UK, including novice (&lt;100 lifetime colonoscopies), intermediate and experienced endoscopists (≥1000). Assessments comprised 24 short endoscopic videos of IBD colonic lesions, divided into 8 non-dysplastic and 16 dysplastic lesions. Participants classified lesions, predicted histology and rated their confidence. All participants completed online training and feedback. Videos were repeated in a random order after ≥7 days. Participants were then randomised 1:1 to get feedback and extra training. All had a final assessment at 60 days with prior/new videos and similar case mix. We report diagnostic performance for dysplasia, interrater reliability and rater confidence. <h3>Results</h3> We present a planned interim analysis of 77 participants after pre- and post-course assessments (table 1). Diagnostic accuracy improved (primary endpoint: 44.5 to 54.0%, <i>P</i>&lt;0.0001), particularly for novice and intermediate endoscopists. Sensitivity for dysplasia increased (50.3 to 59.1%) in line with prior experience. Specificity and accuracy were most improved for high confidence diagnoses (44.9 to 70.3% and 55.0 to 64.6%). In multilevel logistic regression, training was associated with correct diagnoses for high confidence (OR 1.40, 1.13–1.77) but not low confidence ratings (OR 1.09, 0.96–1.25). Training improved precision between participants and their confidence. <h3>Conclusions</h3> The OPTIC-IBD training module improved participants’ accuracy, precision and confidence in the optical diagnosis of IBD-associated dysplasia.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoster presentationsSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207