Standardization of a simplified scintigraphic methodology for the assessment of gastric emptying in a multicenter setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Scintigraphy remains the gold standard to study gastric emptying. The technique is onerous and normal values vary between centers. Standardized protocols, although desirable, are not presently available. We validated a simplified scintigraphic protocol in a multicenter setting. METHODS: In 69 healthy volunteers from seven Canadian institutions, gastric emptying of a standard meal (99mTc-labeled beef liver) was assessed by scintigraphy every 10 min for 1 h, then every 20 min for the next 2 h. Gastric retention was fitted to a power exponential model, Prop(t) = (-(kappat)beta) with Prop(t) = proportion of retention at time t, either using all 13 time intervals (conventional technique) or using measurements at 0, 1, 2, and 3 h (simplified technique). RESULTS: The power exponential model yielded identical emptying curves and T 1/2 values with both techniques. Gastric emptying was more rapid in men than in women < 35 yr (p<0.01) and in younger than in older men (p<0.005). Gastric emptying was slower in women from Québec than in women from Ontario (p<0.04). Gastric retention was similar at 1, 2, and 3 h among the seven centers. Gastric emptying of a beef liver meal was slower than that of a low fat egg substitute (p<0.03). CONCLUSIONS: A simpler scintigraphic approach, using four rather than 13 samples, provides results comparable to those of the conventional technique. This simpler approach provides an economical, yet accurate, alternative to the techniques presently used and is applicable to a multicenter setting.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".