MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060694545 · doi:10.1159/000076540

No More Intravenous Procaine for Pancreatitis Pain?

2004· letter· en· W2060694545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigestion · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcainePancreatitisMedicineAnesthesiaDiseaseIntractable painGeneral surgerySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Having been trained in the German-speaking world ofpancreatology, I was taught that the pain of patients withpancreatitis is special – special in that it responds well tointravenous procaine, a drug then commonly used as ei-ther a local anaesthetic or a cure for ventricular arrhyth-mias. Special also in that drugs generally used for a pain inother diseases were ‘verboten’ in pancreatitis because theywould make the disease worse. Since hands-on experi-mental work had taught me that pancreatitis is, indeed, avery special disease, I followed the rules for medical resi-dents and pancreatitis patients in pain received their24-hour infusions of procaine.First doubts about this approach arose when manypatients treated in this way remained in pain, requiredhigh doses of additional analgesics, or developed ECGchanges. Due to repeated exposure to the Anglo-Saxonworld of pancreatology, my belief was further shakenwhen British or Canadian pancreatitis patients with painwere not regarded as special at all: they received morphinefor severe pain just like cardiac or tumour patients, itrelieved their symptoms sufficiently well, and it did notseem to negatively affect the course of the disease.Many years later, when I participated in the steeringcommittee of an international pancreatitis study and sug-gested to ask in the questionnaire whether patients hadbeen treated for pain with procaine, the response of mypeers from Italy, France, Spain, Scandinavia and the UKranged from bafflement to mild ridicule. None of themhad ever heard of procaine as a treatment of pain in acutepancreatitis.The final results of said study as well as consultation ofstandard textbooks from the countries of my colleaguesmade me realise that pain in pancreatitis is special only –and treated with procaine only – in the German-speakingworld. Why the rest of the world had failed to see the wis-dom of this approach became quickly apparent during aMedline/PubMed search which, at that time, did notresult in a single article or case report when ‘procaine

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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