MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392202492 · doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001704

Clinical utility of elective paediatric flexible bronchoscopy and impact on the quality of life: protocol for a single-centre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4392202492 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rahul J. Thomas, Julie M. Marchant, Vikas Goyal, Ian Brent Masters, Stephanie T. Yerkovich, Anne B. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Respiratory Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilChildren's Health FoundationNational Health and Medical Research CouncilLung Foundation AustraliaRoyal Australasian College of PhysiciansModernaAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Single blindQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialBronchoscopyFlexible bronchoscopyClinical trialSurgeryMedical physicsPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Elective flexible bronchoscopy (FB) is now widely available and standard practice for a variety of indications in children with respiratory conditions. However, there are no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have examined its benefits (or otherwise).Our primary aim is to determine the impact of FB on the parent-proxy quality-of-life (QoL) scores. Our secondary aims are to determine if undertaking FB leads to (a) change in management and (b) improvement of other relevant patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We also quantified the benefits of elective FB (using 10-point Likert scale). We hypothesised that undertaking elective FB will contribute to accurate diagnosis and therefore appropriate treatment, which will in turn improve QoL and will be deemed to be beneficial from patient and doctor perspectives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our parallel single-centre, single-blind RCT (commenced in May 2020) has a planned sample size of 114 children (aged <18 years) recruited from respiratory clinics at Queensland Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. Children are randomised (1:1 concealed allocation) within two strata: age (≤2 vs >2 years) and indication for FB (chronic cough vs other indications) to either (a) early arm (intervention where FB undertaken within 2 weeks) or (b) delayed (control, FB undertaken at usual wait time). Our primary outcome is the difference between groups in their change in QoL at the T2 timepoint when the intervention group has had the FB and the control group has not. Our secondary outcomes are change in management, change in PROMs, adverse events and the Likert scales. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The human research ethics committee of the Queensland Children's Hospital granted ethical clearance (HREC/20/QCHQ/62394). Our RCT is conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice and the Australian legislation. Results will be disseminated through conference presentations, teaching avenues, workshops, websites and publications. REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12620000610932.

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 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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.515
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.085 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open Respiratory ResearchSame topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207