MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W127269753 · doi:10.1155/2005/935161

Should Children with Esophageal Varices Receive Beta-Blockers for the Primary Prevention of Variceal Hemorrhage?

2005· review· en· W127269753 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Simon C. Ling

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSecondary prophylaxisEsophageal varicesNadololHypovolemiaVaricesInternal medicineBETA (programming language)CarvedilolBeta blockerPortal hypertensionRandomized controlled trialEsophagusCardiologyCirrhosisHeart failurePropranolol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esophageal variceal hemorrhage occurs in up to 10% of children with portal hypertension annually, and may be fatal. In contrast to the strong evidence in adults that nonselective beta-adrenergic antagonism reduces the risk of variceal bleeding by approximately 50%, few pediatric data are available. The use of beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis has been reported in children, but not tested in a randomized controlled trial. The risks and benefits in children remain unquantified and may differ from adults in light of the different cardiovascular response to hypovolemia in young children. The circumstances of the individual patient must, therefore, be carefully considered before beta-blockers are prescribed to children with esophageal varices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207