MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975315601 · doi:10.1159/000171239

Radiation and the Small Intestine

2008· review· en· W1975315601 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigestive Diseases · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapySmall intestineLarge intestineGastrointestinal tractIntestinal epitheliumRadiation injuryPathologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineEpitheliumBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiotherapy continues to enjoy a prominent role in the treatment of certain human tumors. Unfortunately, the undesired effect of radiation upon normal intestinal tissue often limits its therapeutic potential. While there is abundant information on the effects of radiation on the morphology of the intestine and on the proliferative process which occurs in the intestinal crypts, there is a paucity of information on the early and late effects of sublethal doses of radiation upon the absorptive functions of the intestine. The intestinal epithelium has a rapid turnover rate and is highly radiosensitive. Radiotherapy for malignant human neoplasms is a relatively safe and effective form of treatment, but it may become limited by its undesired side effects upon the gastrointestinal tract. A variety of clinical tests have been suggested as potential indicators of impending intestinal damage, but there is little information on the time course of radiation damage and the associated impairment of intestinal function. Such basic information is essential to assess early functional changes and to thereby allow for the development of suitable clinical tests to allow for the prediction of impending intestinal damage. Provision of this information to the radiotherapist would permit alterations to the timing or dose schedules of radiotherapy and would allow continued treatment, while avoiding or reducing unwanted side effects. In recent years, there has been extensive research on radiation injury to small intestine. This article will review some of the progress in this field, and will focus on potential future therapy to prevent or treat radiation damage to the intestine. These agents include WR-2721, enprostil, vasopressin, defined-formula diets and alterations in the ratio of dietary polyunsaturated-saturated fatty acids.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.288 · 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