Transcutaneous Cervical and Transabdominal Ultrasonography as a Diagnostic Tool in Gastroesophageal Reflux in Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this study is to investigate if there is a diagnostic expressive difference in the angle of His, upper and lower esophageal diameter (UED and LED), wall thickness of cervical esophagus (WTCE) measured by cervical and transabdominal ultrasonography (USG) between children with (+) and without gastroesophageal reflux (GER-). METHODS: 50 children were separated into 2 groups. Group 1 was the control group (n = 30) consisting of children who had no symptoms of GER and had no GER detected in USG. Group 2 was the study group (n = 20) consisting of children with complaints related to GER, and who were GER+ by USG and esophageal pH monitoring. The USG examinations were completed after having observed 3 episodes of reflux or after 30 min if no reflux was detected. The angle of His, UED, LED and WTCE were measured. In 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring, acid contact to the proximal or distal probe greater than 5.0% of the total time below pH 4 was accepted as pathologic reflux. RESULTS: The age range of the 50 children (30 boys) was 4-13 years. Between the 2 groups there were no differences with regard to age and gender. Values of UED, LED and WTCE were statistically higher in group 2 compared with group 1. The angle of His was higher in the control group, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Our study is the first in the literature that shows that measuring UED, LED and WTCE by USG, which is a noninvasive, readily available repeatable, cheap and fast technique, has a high diagnostic value in children with suspected GER.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".