MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378193473 · doi:10.1155/2023/6636800

Evaluation of the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines Risk Prediction Tool for Acute Aortic Syndrome: The RIPP Score

2023· article· en· W4378193473 on OpenAlex
Robert Ohle, Sarah McIsaac, Madison Van Drusen, Aaron Regis, Owen Montpellier, Mackenzie Ludgate, O. Bodunde, David W. Savage, Krishan Yadav

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmergency Medicine International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaNOSM UniversityOttawa HospitalScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineConfidence intervalChest painInternal medicineAcute coronary syndromePopulationClinical PracticeEmergency departmentEmergency medicinePhysical therapyMyocardial infarctionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is a rare clinical syndrome with a high mortality rate. The Canadian clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis of AAS was developed in order to reduce the frequency of misdiagnoses. As part of the guideline, a clinical decision aid was developed to facilitate clinician decision-making (RIPP score). The aim of this study is to validate the diagnostic accuracy of this tool and assess its performance in comparison to other risk prediction tools that have been developed. Methods. This was a historical case-control study. Consecutive cases and controls were recruited from three academic emergency departments from 2002–2020. Cases were identified through an admission, discharge, or death certificated diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome. Controls were identified through presenting complaint of chest, abdominal, flank, back pain, and/or perfusion deficit. We compared the clinical decision tools’ C statistic and used the DeLong method to test for the significance of these differences and report sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals. Results. We collected data on 379 cases of acute aortic syndrome and 1340 potential eligible controls; 379 patients were randomly selected from the final population. The RIPP score had a sensitivity of 99.7% (98.54–99.99). This higher sensitivity resulted in a lower specificity (53%) compared to the other clinical decision aids (63–86%). The DeLong comparison of the C statistics found that the RIPP score had a higher C statistic than the ADDRS (−0.0423 (95% confidence interval −0.07–0.02); <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>P</a:mi> <a:mo>&lt;</a:mo> <a:mn>0.0009</a:mn> </a:math> ) and the AORTAs score (−0.05 (−0.07 to −0.02); P = 0.0002), no difference compared to the Lovy decision tool (0.02 (95% CI −0.01–0.05 <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:mi>P</c:mi> <c:mo>&lt;</c:mo> <c:mn>0.25</c:mn> </c:math> )) and decreased compared to the Von Kodolitsch decision tool (0.04 (95% CI 0.01–0.07 <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <e:mi>P</e:mi> <e:mo>&lt;</e:mo> <e:mn>0.008</e:mn> </e:math> )). Conclusion. The Canadian clinical practice guideline’s AAS clinical decision aid is a highly sensitive tool that uses readily available clinical information. It has the potential to improve diagnosis of AAS in the emergency department.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.275 · 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