MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4328121694 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8225

Renal colic imaging practice patterns in Ontario: A population-based study

2023· article· en· W4328121694 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Danielle Jenkins, Greg Hosier, Marlo Whitehead, Jonas Shellenberger, Thomas McGregor, D. Robert Siemens

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal colicMedicineLogistic regressionEmergency departmentRadiologyPopulationKidney stonesUnivariate analysisMedical imagingDescriptive statisticsMultivariate analysisSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) is associated with increased cost and exposure to radiation when compared to ultrasound (US) in patients with renal colic. Consequently, a 2014 Choosing Wisely recommendation states US should be used over CT in uncomplicated presentations in patients under age 50. The objective of this study was to describe imaging practice patterns in Ontario among patients presenting with renal colic and the relationship between initial imaging modality, subsequent imaging, and burden of care indicators. METHODS: This is a population-based study of patients who presented with renal colic in Ontario from 2003-2019 using administrative data. Patients were assessed according to their first imaging modality during their index visit. Descriptive statistics and Chi-squared test were used to examine differences between these groups. The primary outcome was the need for subsequent imaging. Secondary outcomes were length of renal colic episode, days to surgery, and number of emergency department (ED ) and primary care visits during the renal colic episode. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: A total of 429 060 patients were included in the final analysis. Of those, 50.5% (216 747) had CT as their initial imaging modality, 20% (84 672) had US, and 3% (13 643) had both on the same day. Subsequent imaging was obtained in 40.7% of those who had CT as the initial imaging, compared to 43% in those who had US and 43% who had both. Of those who initially had an US, 38% went on to have at least one CT during their renal colic episode, including those who had CT on the same day as initial US, while 62% were able to avoid CT altogether. In contrast, 17% had a repeat CT after an initial CT at the time of presentation. The overall use of US increased from 15% to 31% during the study period. The length of the renal colic episode was slightly longer in those who had a CT first compared to US in multivariable models (adjusted risk ratio [ARR ] 1.005, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.000-1.009); however, the time to surgery was less in those who had a CT first (ARR 0.831, 95% CI 0.807-0.856). Fewer ED and family physician visits were seen in those who had an initial CT. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with renal colic in Ontario, approximately half have CT as the initial imaging modality despite US being recommended in uncomplicated presentations. While US use remains low, its use doubled during this study period, demonstrating an encouraging trend. Those who have US first can often avoid subsequent CT.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments→French-language works237,207→