MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400646068 · doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000002964

When Perfect Is the Enemy of Good: Results of a RAND Appropriateness Panel on Treat to Target in Asymptomatic Inflammatory Bowel Disease

2024· article· en· W4400646068 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Systrom, Victoria Rai, Siddharth Singh, Leonard Baidoo, Adam S. Cheifetz, Shane M. Devlin, K Gecse, Peter M. Irving, Gilaad G. Kaplan, Patricia Kozuch, Thomas Ullman, Miles Sparrow, Gil Melmed, Corey A. Siegel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticAdversaryAppropriateness criteriaInternal medicineStatisticsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A treat-to-target strategy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) recommends iterative treatment adjustments to achieve clinical and endoscopic remission. In asymptomatic patients with ongoing endoscopic activity, the risk/benefit balance of this approach is unclear, particularly with prior exposure to advanced therapies. METHODS: Using the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, 9 IBD specialists rated appropriateness of changing therapy in 126 scenarios of asymptomatic patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease and active endoscopic disease. Disease extent and behavior, prior treatment, prior complications, and recent disease progression were considered, as were factors that might influence decision-making, including age and pregnancy. Ratings were collected through anonymous survey, discussed at an in-person meeting, and finalized in a second anonymous survey. RESULTS: Panelists rated change in therapy as appropriate (i.e., expected benefit sufficiently outweighs potential harms from continuing therapy) in 96/126 scenarios, generally in patients with progressive, complicated, and/or extensive disease, while changing therapy was rated uncertain in 27 scenarios of mild and/or stable disease. Changing therapy was rated inappropriate in ulcerative colitis patients with mild and stable disease previously exposed to ≥3 therapies or with improved endoscopic activity, and in Crohn's disease patients with only scattered aphthous ulcers. The validated threshold for disagreement was not crossed for any scenario. Patient age older than 65 years and a plan for pregnancy in the next year might influence decision-making in some settings. DISCUSSION: Appropriateness ratings can help guide clinical decision-making about changing therapy to achieve endoscopic remission in asymptomatic patients with IBD until data from ongoing randomized studies are available.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→