Bibliographic record
Abstract
In adults with diarrhea or suspected malabsorption, a diagnosis of celiac disease requires that two criteria be fulfilled: first, a demonstration of typical pathological changes of untreated disease in biopsies from the proximal small bowel; and second, evidence should exist that clinical (and/or pathological) changes are gluten-dependent, most often as an unequivocal response to a gluten-free diet. Pathological abnormalities of celiac disease may include severe ('flat') or variably severe (mild or moderate) small bowel mucosal architectural abnormalities that are associated with both epithelial cell and lymphoid cell changes, including intraepithelial lymphocytosis. Architectural changes tend to be most severe in the duodenum and proximal jejunum and less severe, or absent, in the ileum. These findings, while characteristic of celiac disease, are not specific because several other conditions can produce similar changes. Some serological assays (eg, tissue transglutaminase antibody assays) are very useful screening tools in clinical practice because of their high specificity and sensitivity, but these do not provide a definitive diagnosis. The most critical step in the diagnosis of celiac disease is the demonstration of its gluten-dependent nature. The clinical response to gluten restriction in celiac disease is usually reflected in the resolution of diarrhea and weight gain. Normalization of biopsy changes can be first shown in the most distal intestinal sites of involvement, and later, sometimes only after prolonged periods (months to years) in the duodenum. Rarely, recurrent (or refractory) celiac disease may occur after an initial gluten-free diet response. Finally, some with 'sprue-like intestinal disease' cannot be classified because a diet response fails to occur. This may be a heterogeneous group, although some are eventually found to have a malignant lymphoma.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".