MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981872170 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v5i12.1942

Dysphagia and Eosinophilic Infiltration of the Esophageal Muscular Layer: A Case Report

2014· article· en· W1981872170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J Plaz, Renzo Giuseppe Di Natale, Marisa Di Natale, Andres Javier Gonzalez-Salazar, Raquel Alexandra Lander

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEosinophilic esophagitisDysphagiaGastroenterologyEsophagusInternal medicineBiopsyHeartburnGERDRefluxSurgeryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases are a group of pathological entities characterized by an eosinophilic infiltration of the gastrointestinal tract without known cause. Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is one of these conditions, which has three diagnostic criteria: symptoms of esophageal dysfunction, mucosal infiltration of 15 eosinophils per high-power field (HPF) microscope and no response to high-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). A 51-year-old patient attended to the emergency department claiming to suffer from heartburn, dysphagia, regurgitation and chest pain. He was treated with high doses of PPIs without success and the condition progressed to food impaction. An esophagogram, which showed esophageal motor dysfunction in the middle and lower part of the esophagus, was performed, and pathologic examination of an esophageal biopsy taken by endoscopy revealed histopathological changes suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease. An esophageal manometry was carried out and it reported diffuse esophageal spasms and a hypertensive inferior esophageal sphincter with incomplete relaxation. A Heller cardiomyotomy was performed and the biopsy specimen revealed fibrosis and eosinophilic infiltration of the muscular layer. Symptoms ceased for 6 months after which symptoms reappeared. The patient was diagnosed with EE and treated with budesonide orally 12 mg/day with complete remission of all symptoms. In this peculiar case, the eosinophilic infiltration was in the muscular layer of the esophagus, not in the mucosa; therefore, it did not meet the diagnostic criteria of EE nor its differential diagnoses. Nevertheless, treatment with oral steroids was in fact effective. J Med Cases. 2014;5(12):621-626 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jmc1942w

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0100.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207