Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To investigate the bleeding risk of colonoscopy with polypectomy in patients taking clopidogrel. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients undergoing colonoscopy with polypectomy without interruption of clopidogrel. Patients with lesions larger than 1cm were generally rescheduled for polypectomy off clopidogrel. Most of the polyps were removed using cold snare technique. Endoscopic clips were routinely applied prophylactically. RESULTS: A total of 125 polypectomies were performed in 60 patients. The average polyp size was 5.4 ± 2.1 mm. One patient (1.7%, CI 0.3-8.9%) developed post-polypectomy bleeding that resolved without treatment. Three patients (5%, CI 1.7-14%) had immediate bleeding during the procedure and all resolved with prompt clip application. CONCLUSIONS: Polypectomy of lesions up to 1cm in size can be performed without interruption of clopidogrel.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".