MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968066367 · doi:10.1016/j.carj.2012.01.002

Clinical and Endoscopic Significance of Bowel-Wall Thickening Reported on Abdominal Computed Tomographies in Symptomatic Patients with No History of Gastrointestinal Disease

2012· article· en· W1968066367 on OpenAlexaffabout
Saad Alkhowaiter, Mayur Brahmania, Edward Kim, Mark Madden, Alison Harris, Eric M. Yoshida, James R. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyInflammatory bowel diseaseDiseaseInternal medicineGastroenterologyAbnormalityAbdominal painPancolitisUlcerative colitisRadiologyGastrointestinal pathologyMedical recordColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bowel-wall thickening (BWT) is a commonly reported finding on diagnostic abdominal pelvic computed tomographies (CT) in patients with no history of gastroenterologic disease. The significance of this nonspecific finding is not clear. METHODS: Medical records from the Vancouver General Hospital were reviewed from October 27, 1999, to October 27, 2009. The initial search yielded 5696 cases, of which 76 cases met the inclusion criteria for review. Inclusion criteria were the following: age older than 18 years, symptoms without a diagnosis of gastrointestinal disease before CT, the reported finding of terminal ileal and/or colonic BWT, colonoscopy after CT, and/or microbiologic investigations. Exclusion criteria included known gastrointestinal disease before CT. The primary objective was to determine if BWT could be associated with a significant endoscopic pathology. The secondary objective was to determine whether the pattern of abnormality on the CT was associated with a specific endoscopic finding. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients met the inclusion criteria of our study. Of those, 76% had various identifiable pathologies on colonoscopy. Only 24% had normal colonoscopic findings. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and infectious colitis were the most common causes of BWT. A report of "skip lesions" on the CT (5%) was always associated with IBD. "Pancolitis" reported on the CT (11%) was associated with endoscopic findings of IBD in 25% of cases, infection in 50% of cases, and normal findings in 25% of cases. The report of "stranding" (36%) on CT in the presence of BWT was associated with many non-neoplastic endoscopic pathologic processes, including infectious colitis (22%), IBD (19%), and ischemia (15%), but also was associated with normal endoscopic findings in 26% of the cases. "Lymphadenopathy" was reported in 17% of the CTs and was associated with infectious colitis (30%), IBD (38%), or neoplastic processes (15%) but also normal endoscopic findings in 15%. CONCLUSION: Symptomatic patients who are found to have nonspecific BWT on CT should undergo definitive endoscopic investigation because the majority will have significant gastroenterologic disease, and only a minority will have a normal colonoscopy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207