<b>Comparison of Multidetector CT and Barium Studies of the Small Bowel:</b> Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We compared barium studies of the small bowel with multidetector CT (MDCT) in the evaluation of the small bowel during the initial presentation of inflammatory bowel disease in a pediatric population. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study. Eighteen children undergoing workup for inflammatory bowel disease underwent MDCT, colonoscopy, and barium studies of the small bowel before commencement of therapy. Examinations were independently reviewed. The patients and their guardians completed a questionnaire assessing the acceptability of each study. RESULTS: In 13 of 18 children, the findings of MDCT and barium studies of the small bowel concurred in the evaluation of terminal ileum disease. In three of these children, MDCT detected skip segments of small-bowel disease not detected on barium studies of the small bowel. In two of 18 children, the terminal ileum was not visualized on barium studies of the small bowel, whereas MDCT showed substantial terminal ileum disease in both children. In three of 18 children, there was discordance between the two tests regarding terminal ileum disease. However, these discordant imaging findings were all subtle. In addition, MDCT revealed extraenteric abnormalities, clinically relevant in two children (ureteric obstruction and perirectal abscess), and showed the colon in all children, seven of whom had incomplete colonoscopy. The questionnaire revealed that 16 of 18 patients preferred MDCT to small-bowel barium studies. The reasons given were poor tolerance of oral barium and the long duration of barium studies of the small bowel. CONCLUSION: MDCT can be an alternative to barium studies of the small bowel for evaluation of the small bowel in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. MDCT also offers additional, clinically relevant information not obtained by small-bowel barium studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".