MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7074052655

Comparative quantitative survey of patient experience in Barrett’s oesophagus and other Gastrointestinal disorders

2019· article· en· W7074052655 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsLMC Diabetes & Endocrinology (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorryHeartburnAnxietyCancerDepression (economics)Quality of life (healthcare)DiseaseRegurgitation (circulation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To assess Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in patients with non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus (NDBO) and endoscopically treated dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus (DBO). Design: This quantitative, self-administered questionnaire study was conducted across three NHS hospitals. Data were collected from three other cohorts; gastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD), colonic polyp surveillance and healthy individuals. Fisher’s exact and Spearman’s rank correlation tests were used for analysis. Propensity matching scores adjusted for age, sex and comorbidities followed by average treatment effects were computed.Results: 687 participants were eligible for analysis (NDBO n= 306, DBO n= 49, GORD n= 132, Colonic polyps n= 152 and Healthy n=48). 53% of NDBO participants reported similarly high cancer worry, comparable to DBO (50%, p=0.933) and colonic polyp participants (51%, p=0.355). Less cancer worry was reported in GORD participants (43.4%, p=0.01 vs NDBO). NDBO participants reported anxiety in 15.8% and depression in 8.6% of cases, which was similar to the other disease cohorts. Moderate-severe heartburn or acid regurgitation was found in 11% and 10% respectively in the NDBO cohort, comparable to DBO participants (heartburn 2% p=0.172, acid regurgitation 4% p=0.31) but lower (better) than GORD participants (heartburn 31% p=<0.001, acid regurgitation 25% p=0.001). NDBO participants with moderate/severe GORD symptoms were associated with higher rates of anxiety (p=<0.001), depression (p=<0.001) and cancer worry (p=<0.001). NDBO patients appropriately perceiving their cancer risk as low had lower rates of cancer worry (p=<0.001). Conclusion: This study provides insight into the problems BO patients may face. Future care pathways must be more patient focused to address misconceptions of cancer risk, oesophageal cancer related worry and GORD symptom control. Key Words: Barrett’s Oesophagus, Quality of Life, Surveillance, Endoscopy

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester)Same topicGestational Trophoblastic Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207