MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401015234 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079599

Global evaluation and outcomes of cholecystectomy: protocol for a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study (GlobalSurg 4)

2024· article· en· W4401015234 on OpenAlexaff
Ewen M. Harrison, Sivesh K. Kamarajah

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Prospective cohort studyCholecystectomyEpidemiologyCohort studyFamily medicineGeneral surgeryAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cholecystectomy is one of the most common operations performed worldwide. Although laparoscopic surgery has been the 'gold-standard' approach for this operation, there is a paucity of global evidence around the variations of safe provision of cholecystectomy, including low-income and middle-income countries. This international collaborative study will allow contemporaneous data collection on the quality of cholecystectomies using measures covering infrastructure, care processes and outcomes, with the primary aim define the global variation in compliance with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative audit standards. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Global Evaluation of Cholecystectomy Knowledge and Outcomes is a prospective, international, multicentre, observational cohort study delivered by the GlobalSurg Collaborative. Consecutive patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 31 July 2023 and 19 November 2023 will be recruited, with follow-up at 30 days and 1-year postoperatively. The study will be undertaken at any hospital providing emergency or elective surgical services for biliary disease. The primary endpoint of this study is compliance with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative audit standards. Secondary outcomes include rates of 30-day complications, achievement of critical view of safety and rates of gallbladder cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project will not affect clinical practice and has been classified as clinical audit following research ethics review at University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust. The protocol will be disseminated through the international GlobalSurg and CovidSurg network. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06223061.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.006

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.426 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersFrench-language works237,207