MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414775604 · doi:10.1002/jpn3.70212

Numbers matter: How pediatric endoscopy quality varies with annual procedural volume

2025· article· en· W4414775604 on OpenAlexaff
Jeannie S. Huang, Lillian Choi, Tom K. Lin, Jenifer R. Lightdale, Catharine M. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)EndoscopyMEDLINEVolume (thermodynamics)Quality management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: There is limited data linking pediatric endoscopist experience and procedural quality. We aimed to examine the associations of faculty physicians' years in practice and independent annual procedural volume (APV) with published quality indicators for pediatric endoscopy, including terminal ileal intubation rate (TIIR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and total procedure time. METHODS: We extracted quality indicators, as defined by the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN), for ileocolonoscopies performed by faculty endoscopists at a pediatric tertiary-care academic institution from October 2021 to May 2024. Endoscopists were categorized by years' experience and APV. Quality indicators were compared across groups using Kruskal-Wallis analyses. Multivariate modeling was performed to identify variables predicting terminal ileal intubation and TIIR ≥ 85%. Proportional hazards modeling was performed to identify variables predicting shorter procedure duration for combined esophagogastroduodenoscopy and ileocolonoscopy procedures. RESULTS: Nine hundred and eighty-five ileocolonoscopies were performed independently by 20 faculty endoscopists, with varying years' experience (<5 years: N = 7; 5-10 years: N = 3; ≥10 years: N = 10), and a median (interquartile range) APV of 19 (14, 45). Most procedures (71.7%) were scored as demonstrating adequate bowel preparation. Overall TIIR and CIR were 86.3% and 91.6%, respectively. In multivariate modeling, APV ≥ 40 was identified as predictive for TIIR ≥ 85% (p < 0.01) while faculty years' experience (≥10 vs. <10 years) predicted shorter procedure duration (adjusted hazard ratio [confidence interval]: 1.40 [1.23, 1.59]). CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed a significant association between pediatric quality indicators and individual endoscopist APV and years of experience. Our findings also suggest that performing ≥40 ileocolonoscopies annually may help ensure high-quality endoscopic procedures in children.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207