MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117586828 · doi:10.1177/19160216251407670

Shared Decision-Making During Surgical Consultations for Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules

2025· article· en· W7117586828 on OpenAlexaffabout
Travis Pickett, Brooke Turner, Claire Hermiston, Tara Azad, D. Goldstein, Matthew H. Rigby, Stephanie Johnson‐Obaseki, Martin Corsten, David Forner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityUniversity of OttawaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThyroid nodulesOtorhinolaryngologyIndeterminateUltrasoundEndobronchial ultrasoundThyroid cancerThyroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance Several feasible management options exist for indeterminate thyroid nodules (ITNs), which can lead to decisional conflict (DC) and uncertainty in patients. Objective To investigate patient and physician participation in shared decision-making (SDM) during the management of ITNs and the association of SDM with patient-perceived DC. Study Design Multi-institutional, cross-sectional, multiple methods study. Setting The Queen Elizabeth II Health Science Centre (Halifax, Nova Scotia) from October 2020 to June 2023 and The Ottawa Hospital (Ottawa, Ontario) from November 2022 to June 2023. Intervention and Exposures Patients with ITNs scheduled for an initial surgical consultation with an Otolaryngologist were included. Consultations were video-recorded using discreet cameras within clinic rooms at both sites. Management options discussed at both sites included repeat fine needle aspiration biopsy, ultrasound surveillance, surgery, and molecular testing. Main Outcome Measures Patient-perceived SDM was measured by the SDM Questionnaire-9 (SDM-Q-9) and perceived DC by the DC Scale (DCS). Surgeons’ perceptions of SDM were measured by the SDM-Q-Doc. Observer-determined SDM was reported using the multifocal approach to sharing in SDM (MAPPIN’SDM) instrument. Results Seventy-seven patients and 6 surgeons were included. Patient-perceived SDM was high [mean = 94.38, standard deviation (SD) = 7.61], while physician-perceived SDM was lower in comparison (mean = 83.21, SD = 9.14). Observer-determined SDM involvement of the patient (mean = 0.73, SD = 1.08), physician (mean = 1.71, SD = 1.33), and patient-physician dyad (mean = 1.75, SD = 1.27) was low. Clinically significant DC (DCS score ≥25) was reported by 13.2% of patients. There was a medium negative correlation between patient-perceived SDM involvement and DC (Pearson r = −0.311, P = 0.008). Patient-perceived SDM did not differ by clinicodemographic factors. Conclusion While patients and physicians perceived high levels of SDM, patients with ITNs are faced with difficult management decisions leading to DC. Relevance These findings highlight the need for developing decision-aids to support SDM and reduce DC in the management of ITNs.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck SurgerySame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207