MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546161229 · doi:10.1155/2010/341925

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Features, Endoscopic Findings and Response to Treatment

2010· article· en· W1546161229 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Enns, Pooya Kazemi, Wiley Chung, Mitchell Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEosinophilic esophagitisDysphagiaFluticasoneAsthmaFamily historyEsophagusInternal medicineEsophagitisSurgeryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is a motility disorder of the esophagus that typically presents with dysphagia. The objective of the present study was to explore patient characteristics, clinical and endoscopic features, and response to treatment of patients with EE. Patients were selected retrospectively based on a review of biopsy results from previous endoscopies performed between 2004 and 2008. A total of 54 patients (41 men and 13 women) with biopsy-proven EE were included in the study. Further information regarding the patients' clinical and endoscopic features, and response to treatment were obtained through chart reviews and patient telephone interviews. The mean age of the patients at symptom onset was 30 years. All patients complained of dysphagia, 81% had a history of bolus obstruction, 43% had a history of asthma and 70% had a history of environmental allergies. Thirty-three per cent had a family history of asthma, while 52% had a family history of food or seasonal allergies. The most common endoscopic findings were rings and⁄or corrugations, which were found in 63% of patients. Swallowed fluticasone therapy resulted in symptom resolution in 74% of patients; however, 79% of these patients relapsed after discontinuing fluticasone therapy and required repeat treatments. Esophageal dilation was complication free and resulted in improvement in 80% of patients. However, 83% of those reporting improvement relapsed within one year. The clinical and endoscopic findings were similar to those found in the literature, with most patients requiring ongoing, repeated therapies. Further studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of treatment modalities ideally suited to patients with EE.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology and HepatologySame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207