FP1.3 - SPEC MDT in Aneurin Bevan University Health Board
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims The SPEC (significant polyp and early cancer) multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meeting was started in ABUHB in 2022 to discuss complex colonic and rectal polyp cases, such as polyps >20mm, likely to be sessile, or difficult to remove endoscopically. The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and clinical role of the SPEC MDT. Methods Data for patients discussed in SPEC MDT since its conception in January 2022 until September 2023 was retrospectively collected from the SPEC MDT database, a prospectively collected database. This included patient demographics, reason for referral, polyp characteristics and MDT outcomes. Results In 21 months, there have been 38 SPEC MDTs, with 355 cases discussed (average of 9 cases per MDT). There was at least one laparoscopic colorectal surgeon, gastroenterologist and a histopathologist in every MDT in accordance with BSG guidelines. Main referral reasons included endoscopy findings (72%) and re-discussion post-procedure (22%). Twenty-three patients had adenocarcinomas and three had NETs. MDT outcomes were EMR (23%), endoscopic surveillance (21%), clinic to discuss (no) surgery (19%), TAMIS (16%), urgent endoscopy (13%) or other (8%). Conclusion As the busiest Health Board in Wales for Colorectal Cancers, the formation of SPEC MDT has been an important step in improving the detection and treatment of advanced polyps and early cancers. Although too early to measure the impact on early cancer detection rates and improved decision making for these patients, formalising the MDT process in line with BSG guidelines has been an important step in improving the service offered to patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".