MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976114566 · doi:10.3748/wjg.v13.i47.6296

Review of idiopathic pancreatitis

2007· review· en· W1976114566 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Kihyuk Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Gastroenterology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEtiologyPancreatitisMedicineAutoimmune pancreatitisIntensive care medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

inflammation within the pancreas.Acute pancreatitis (AP) results in acute inflammation typically presenting as abdominal pain with elevated levels of pancreatic enzymes [1] .Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is defined as a clinical syndrome of progressive inflammatory changes in the pancreas leading to permanent structural damage with subsequent impairment of both exocrine and endocrine function [2] .Chronic pancreatitis is often preceded by recurrent bouts of acute pancreatitis, however, occasionally it can present in a 'silent' fashion.The label of "idiopathic pancreatitis" (IP) was originally designated to cases of pancreatitis wherein a diagnosis could not be made through a thorough history, physical examination, laboratory studies, and noninvasive imaging modalities such as abdominal ultrasonography/ computerized tomography.Previously, this nomenclature had accounted for 8%-44% of cases being ter med "idiopathic" [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] .Recent new laboratory and technological advances have been able to shred the enigmatic veils of IP to a point wherein with extensive evaluation it is possible to reveal the etiology in 79%-80% of patients previously labeled as having "idiopathic pancreatitis" [10,11] .More modern imaging investigations include, but are not limited to fine cut computerized tomography, endoscopic retrog rade pancreatog raphy, magnetic resonance pancreatography as well as endoscopic ultrasound. EPIDEMIOLOGYLongitudinal data on incidence trends report an increase in AP [12] which may be attributable to increases in all causes of pancreatitis as well as improved detection methods.The fatality rate for pancreatitis has continued to range between 3%-10% [13][14][15][16][17][18] despite a marked decrease in pancreatitis case fatality presumably secondary to early recognition of severity and complications as well as improved intensive care management [14,15] .Thomson [6] and others [7,17] have noted that in AP mortality rates are greater when the etiology is IP (14.1%) [6] , compared with gallstone pancreatitis (7.2%) [6] .In addition, the clinical impact of IP is further highlighted by the fact that 40 percent (the largest subgroup) of all AP fatalities are attributable to IP [19,20] .The incidence of IP ranges from 4.21 per 100 000 [21] to as high as 45.33 per 100 000 [9] depending on the population studied and the time in which data was collected with a trend toward high incidence in populations studied more recently [12,13,22] .The incidence appears to be

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.006

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations70
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of GastroenterologySame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207