MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400936804 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082912

Core socioDemographic data variables in ICU Trials (CoDe-IT): a protocol for generating core data variables using a Delphi consensus process

2024· article· en· W4400936804 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karla D. Krewulak, Fatima Sheikh, Alya Heirali, John C. Marshall, Karen E. A. Burns, Scotty Kupsch, Christina Maratta, Srinivas Murthy, Katie O’Hearn, Kristine Russell, Sangeeta Mehta, Kirsten M. Fiest

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoAlberta Health ServicesMcMaster UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDelphi methodHealth careProtocol (science)DelphiPopulationResearch ethicsHealth services researchNursingPublic healthAlternative medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Sociodemographic variables influence health outcomes, either directly (ie, gender identity) or indirectly (eg, structural/systemic racism based on ethnoracial group). Identification of how sociodemographic variables can impact the health of critically ill adults is important to guide care and research design for this population. However, despite the growing recognition of the importance of collecting sociodemographic measures that influence health outcomes, insufficient and inconsistent data collection of sociodemographic variables persists in critical care studies. We aim to develop a set of core data variables (CoDaV) for social determinants of health specific to studies involving critically ill adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review to generate a list of possible sociodemographic measures to be used for round 1 of the modified Delphi processes. We will engage relevant knowledge users (previous intensive care unit patients and family members, critical care researchers, critical care clinicians and research co-ordinators) to participate in the modified Delphi consensus survey to identify the CoDaV. A final consensus meeting will be held with knowledge user representatives to discuss the final CoDaV, how each sociodemographic variable will be collected (eg, level of granularity) and how to disseminate the CoDaV for use in critical care studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Calgary conjoint health research ethics board has approved this study protocol (REB22-1648).

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)0.318
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.277
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3180.277
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.013

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 head0.898
GPT teacher head0.696
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainReporting
GenreProtocol

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207