MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021118758 · doi:10.1517/14656566.4.3.385

Pharmacological management of Cronkhite–Canada syndrome

2003· review· en· W2021118758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric M. Ward, Herbert C. Wolfsen

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAntibioticsIntensive care medicineDiseasePrednisoneRegimenInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cronkhite-Canada syndrome (CCS) is a rare, non-inherited gastrointestinal polyposis syndrome associated with characteristic ectodermal abnormalities. A number of potentially life-threatening complications including malnutrition, gastrointestinal bleeding and infection may occur in affected patients and CCS is fatal in many cases. The optimal therapy for CCS is not known but several treatment options have been described. Nutritional support, antibiotics, corticosteroids, anabolic steroids, histamine-receptor antagonists and surgical treatment have all been used with varying degrees of success. Unfortunately, controlled therapeutic trials have not been possible because of the rarity of the disease. Most recently, a combination regimen using histamine-receptor antagonists, cromolyn sodium, prednisone and suppressive antibiotics has been described. The reported treatment options and rates of success are reviewed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations74
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on PharmacotherapySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207