MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epidemiology of Barrett’s esophagus and adenocarcinoma*

2002· article· en· W2057864275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adrian J. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Esophagus · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyEsophagusBarrett's esophagusQuarter (Canadian coin)Esophageal adenocarcinomaRefluxEndoscopyAdenocarcinomaGeneral surgeryGastroenterologyInternal medicineCancerDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The definition of Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is made when visible red columnar epithelium is seen in the esophagus, with intestinal metaplasia seen on biopsy. Most epidemiologic data relates to long-segment BE, 3 cm or longer. Short segments or tongues < 3 cm are now increasingly recognized as having a risk for development of adenocarcinoma. Biopsies taken just below a normally located squamocolumnar junction in consecutive patients having endoscopy will show intestinal metaplasia in about 15% of cases.1 The cancer risk in such patients with intestinal metaplasia of the cardia is probably low, but has not been documented adequately. Questionnaires sent to random members of the population have shown that about 18% of adults have heartburn at least once a week, and that 7% have heartburn every day.2,3 Prospective studies in which people with frequent (at least weekly) heartburn had endoscopy showed that about 5% have BE (> 3 cm, with intestinal metaplasia).4–6 If about 1 in 5 persons have frequent reflux symptoms, and about 1 in 20 with reflux symptoms have BE, then the prevalence of BE in the general adult population can be estimated at about 1 in 100 persons. Not all patients with BE have reflux symptoms, however. In patients with a short history of cancer-related symptoms (dysphagia, bleeding, weight loss), in whom endoscopy shows adenocarcinoma and a previously undiagnosed BE, only about 60% have a long previous history of reflux symptoms.7,8 In a large series of patients having upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for various clinical indications, the prevalence of BE was found to be rare in childhood and to rise progressively with age, consistent with an acquired disorder.9 After the age of 60 years, BE was found in about 1% of patients having routine endoscopy. The prevalence in males was twice that in females in this series.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Review

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

Citations65
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the EsophagusSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207