Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spontaneous free perforation of the small intestine is uncommon, especially if there is no prior history of visceral trauma. However, free, even recurrent, perforation may complicate a defined and established clinical disorder, such as Crohn's disease. In addition, free perforation may be the initial clinical presentation of an occult intestinal disorder, such as a lymphoma complicating celiac disease, causing diffuse peritonitis and an acute abdomen. Initial diagnosis of the precise cause may be difficult, but now has been aided by computerized tomographic imaging. The site of perforation may be helpful in defining a cause (e.g., ileal perforation in Crohn's disease, jejunal perforation in celiac disease, complicated by lymphoma or collagenous sprue). Urgent surgical intervention, however, is usually required for precise diagnosis and treatment. During evaluation, an expanding list of other possible causes should be considered, even after surgery, as subsequent management may be affected. Free perforation may not only complicate an established intestinal disorder, but also a new acute process (e.g., caused by different infectious agents) or a longstanding and unrecognized disorder (e.g., congenital, metabolic and vascular causes). Moreover, new endoscopic therapeutic and medical therapies, including use of emerging novel biological agents, have been complicated by intestinal perforation. Recent studies also support the hypothesis that perforation of the small intestine may be genetically-based with different mutations causing altered connective tissue structure, synthesis and repair.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".