European Biliary Atresia Registries: Summary of a Symposium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biliary atresia (BA) is a rare but potentially devastating disease. The European Biliary Atresia Registry (EBAR) was set up to improve data collection and to develop a pan-national and interdisciplinary strategy to improve clinical outcomes. From 2001 to 2005, 100 centers from 22 countries registered with EBAR via its website (www.biliary-atresia.com). In June 2006, the first meeting was held to evaluate results and launch further initiatives. During a 5-year period, 60 centers from 19 European countries and Israel sent completed registration forms for a total of 514 BA patients. Assuming the estimated incidence of BA in Europe is 1:18,000 live births, 35% of the expected 1488 patients from all EBAR participating countries were captured, suggesting that reporting arrangements need improvement. At the meeting, the cumulative evaluation of 928 BA patients including patients from other registries with variable follow-up revealed an overall survival of 78% (range from 41% to 92%), of whom 342 patients (37%) have had liver transplants. Survival with native liver ranged from 14% to 75%. There was a marked variance in reported management and outcome by country (e.g., referral patterns, timing of surgery, centralization of surgery). In conclusion, EBAR represents the first attempt at an overall evaluation of the outcome of BA from a pan-European perspective. The natural history and outcome of biliary atresia is of considerable relevance to a European population. It is essential that there is further support for a pan-European registry with coordination of clinical standards, further participation of parent support groups, and implementation of online data entry and multidisciplinary clinical and basic research projects.
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 | 0.032 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".