MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403830804 · doi:10.1681/asn.2024zadzzrk3

Kidney Point-of-Care Ultrasonography (POCUS): Development and Evaluation of a Training Program for Nephrology Fellows

2024· article· en· W4403830804 on OpenAlexaff
Sara S. Jdiaa, Mohammad Azfar Qureshi, Alireza Zahirieh, Ann Young, Darren A. Yuen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNephrologyMedicineUltrasonographyInternal medicinePoint of careIntensive care medicineUrologyPathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Insonation is now considered the 5th pillar in physical examination. Despite its exciting potential, the uptake of POCUS in nephrology training curricula is slow. Our study aims to evaluate a locally developed program to train nephrology fellows to accurately perform a kidney POCUS scan to answer two important questions in the workup of kidney dysfunction in hospitalized patients: 1) is there urinary tract obstruction? and 2) are there small kidneys? Methods: The program consisted of two workshops that included a didactic session and hands-on training session. Trainees identified the presence or absence of urinary tract obstruction in each native kidney or kidney allograft. They also performed a measurement of kidney length. POCUS findings were compared with the abdominal ultrasound exams performed in the medical imaging department. All nephrology fellows participating in the workshop completed pre- and post-workshop surveys to document self-reported comfort level with the use of renal POCUS. Patients were asked to complete a patient satisfaction questionnaire. Results: A total of 56 native kidneys were assessed. Assessment of hydronephrosis compared to radiology-read kidney imaging reports revealed a specificity of 0.96. Assessment of small right and left kidney size showed a specificity of 0.81 and 0.75, respectively. A total of 32 transplant kidneys were assessed. Assessment of hydronephrosis and kidney allograft size revealed a specificity of 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. Post-workshop, 10 out of 11 trainees had an overall comfort level of 5 or greater out of 7 using POCUS for kidney assessment, in ruling out urinary tract obstruction and measuring kidney size. A total of 51 patients were surveyed. Most patients (71%) strongly agreed that their interaction with their doctors was improved with POCUS. Conclusion: Our study shows that training programs can provide trainees with the confidence to acquire and apply skills in POCUS and the downstream benefits from patient satisfaction.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207