P277 Interobserver agreement of current and new proposed endoscopic scores for postoperative recurrence in Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The modified Rutgeerts’ score (mRS) is widely used for the assessment of endoscopic postoperative recurrence (ePOR) in Crohn’s disease (CD) after ileocolic resection to guide therapeutic decisions. To improve the validity and prognostic value of this endoscopic assessment, two new scores have been proposed. This study assessed the interobserver agreement of the current (mRS) and new endoscopic scores for ePOR in CD. Methods Sixteen academic and non-academic IBD specialists assessed endoscopic videos (n=71) of postoperative CD patients (n=66) retrieved from nine Dutch centers. Each video was assessed for the degree of inflammation by four gastroenterologists using the mRS, REMIND score (separate score of anastomosis and neoterminal ileum) and anatomic score (separate score of lesions at the anastomotic line, ileal body, ileal inlet, neoterminal ileum, colonic and/or ileal blind loop). Interobserver agreement was assessed using Fleiss’ weighted kappa. Results Fleiss’ weighted kappa for the mRS was 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.74). The weighted kappa for the REMIND score was 0.73 (95% CI 0.65–0.80) for lesions in the neoterminal ileum and 0.46 (95% CI 0.35–0.58) for anastomotic lesions. In the anatomic score, the weighted kappa for lesions in the ileal body, ileal inlet, neoterminal ileum, colonic and ileal blind loop was 0.61 (95% CI 0.49–0.73), 0.63 (95% CI 0.54–0.72), 0.61 (95% CI 0.49–0.74), 0.83 (95% CI 0.62–1.00) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.46–0.89), and 0.44 (95% CI 0.32–0.55) for lesions at the anastomotic line. Conclusion The interobserver agreement of the mRS is substantial. Similarly, the interobserver agreement is substantial for lesions in the neoterminal ileum according to both the REMIND and anatomic score, whereas only moderate for anastomotic lesions. Since therapeutic decisions in clinical practice are based on these assessments and these scores are used as outcome measure in clinical studies, further improvement of agreement is essential.
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 | 0.020 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".