Inter‐disciplinary provider development of an online, interactive adolescent varicocele decision aid prototype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Decision-making regarding varicocele management can be a complex process for patients and families. However, to date, no studies have presented ways to mitigate the decisional conflict surrounding varicoceles. OBJECTIVE: To facilitate a discussion among physicians in order to develop a framework of the decision-making process regarding adolescent varicocele management, which will inform the development of the first online, interactive decision aid. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with pediatric urologists and interventional radiologists were conducted to discuss their rationale for varicocele decision-making. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded. Key themes were identified, grouped, and then qualitatively analyzed using thematic analysis. Utilizing the common themes identified and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, a decision aid prototype was developed and transformed into a user-friendly website: varicoceledecisionaid.com. RESULTS: Pediatric urologists (n = 10) and interventional radiologists (n = 2) were interviewed. Key themes identified included: (1) definition/epidemiology; (2) observation as an appropriate management choice; (3) reasons to recommend repair; (4) types of repair; (5) reasons to recommend one repair over another; (6) shared decision-making; and (7) appropriate counseling. With this insight, a varicocele decision aid prototype was developed that engages patients and parents in the decision-making process. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: This is the first interactive and easily accessible varicocele decision aid prototype developed by inter-disciplinary physicians for patients. This tool aids in decision-making surrounding varicocele surgery. It can be used before or after consultation to help families understand more about varicoceles and their repair, and why intervention may or may not be offered. It also considers a patient and family's personal values. Future studies will incorporate the patient and family perspective into the decision-making aid as well as implement and test the usability of this decision aid prototype in practice and in the wider urologic community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".