Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he association between inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and the development of colorectal cancer (CRC) was first described over eight decades ago (1).However, it was not until the late 1970s that the true clinical significance of this association was appreciated.It is now accepted that both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are associated with an increased risk of CRC (2).It is believed that CRC arises from dysplastic precursor lesions.Unlike the typical dysplasia-carcinoma sequence, the dysplastic lesions are believed to arise in flat mucosa and do not assume a mass-like or polypoid lesion.A recent meta-analysis (3) of 116 published articles estimated the risk of CRC in UC to be 2% at 10 years, 8% at 20 years and 13% at 30 years.Aside from the duration of the disease, the extent (4), family history (5,6) and early onset of CRC (7), along with concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (8,9), are risk factors for the development of CRC.Similar rates of CRC have recently been demonstrated in patients with CD (10).This epidemiological relationship has led to the practice of surveillance colonoscopy in groups at risk.The initial intent of entering patients into a dysplasia surveillance program was to stratify patients into highrisk groups in need of proctocolectomy and low-risk groups who could continue in the surveillance program.
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 | 0.013 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".