MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387082213 · doi:10.1016/j.obpill.2023.100090

Review of an international pilot project to adapt the Canadian Adult Obesity Clinical Practice Guideline

2023· article· en· W4387082213 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ximena Ramos Salas, M. Contreras, Cathy Breen, Yudith Preiss, Brad Hussey, Mary Forhan, Sean Wharton, Denise Campbell‐Scherer, Michael Vallis, Jennifer Brown, Sue D. Pedersen, Arya M. Sharma, Euan Woodward, Ian Patton, Nicole Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Pillars · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreRockyview General HospitalCanadian Obesity NetworkUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of AlbertaMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersObesity CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNovo Nordisk
KeywordsGuidelineHealth careMedicineStigma (botany)Best practiceObesityMedical educationPolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The evidence-based Canadian Adult Obesity Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) released in August 2020 were developed through a systematic literature review and patient-oriented research process. This CPG is considered a paradigm shift for obesity care as it introduced a new obesity definition that is based on health not body size, incorporates lived experiences of people affected by obesity, and addresses the pervasive weight bias and stigma that patients face in healthcare systems. The purpose of this pilot project was to assess the feasibility of adapting the Canadian CPG in Chile and Ireland. Methods: An International Clinical Practice Guideline Adaptation Committee was established to oversee the project. The project was conducted through four interrelated phases: 1) planning and preparation; 2) pilot project application process; 3) adaptation; and 4) launch, dissemination, and implementation. Ireland used the GRADE-ADAPTE framework and Chile used the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach. Results: Chile and Ireland developed their adapted guidelines in one third of the time it took to develop the Canadian guidelines. In Ireland, 18 chapters, which underpin the 80 key recommendations, were contextually adapted. Chile adopted 18 chapters and 76 recommendations, adapted one recommendation, and developed 12 new recommendations. . Conclusion: The pilot project demonstrated it is feasible to adapt the Canadian CPG for use in other countries with different healthcare systems, languages, and cultural contexts, while retaining the Canadian CPG's key principles and values such as the treatment of obesity as a chronic disease, adoption of new clinical assessment approaches that go beyond anthropometric measurements, elimination of weight bias and stigma, shifting obesity care outcomes to improved health and well-being rather than weight loss alone, and the use of patient-centred, collaborative and shared-decision clinical care approaches.

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)0.200
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.346
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2000.346
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.360 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity PillarsSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207