Results of the 2nd scientific workshop of the ECCO (IV): Therapeutic strategies to enhance intestinal healing in inflammatory bowel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence supporting the importance of assessment of mucosal healing in inflammatory bowel disease has increased in the last years. Mucosal healing has been integrated in the assessment of treatment efficacy in ulcerative colitis, but in Crohn's disease this thought has arised after biological agents have been evaluated in clinical trials. Although a validated definition of mucosal healing still does not exist, its use is also assuming an increasingly important role in the follow-up of individual patients in clinical practice. Corticosteroids induce mucosal healing in a small proportion of patients with Crohn's disease and are of no benefit to maintain it. By contrast, mucosal healing in Crohn's disease can be achieved and maintained, with varying degrees of evidence and success, with thiopurines and biological agents. In ulcerative colitis, the ability of corticosteroids to induce mucosal healing is well recognized. 5-aminosalicylates, thiopurines and biological agents are also able to induce mucosal healing and, additionally, to maintain it. Mucosal healing assessment should be considered in clinical practice when symptoms persist despite therapy or when treatment discontinuation is being considered. Conversely, in patients whose clinical remission is not associated with mucosal healing, intensification of treatment is not currently recommended because of lack of evidence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".