Spinal cord stimulation in a patient with persistent oesophageal pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes a man with a long history of oesophageal pain that led to inability to swallow food and drink. Over a period of 8 years, he had multiple oesophageal operations that were unsuccessful. He presented, to the pain management team, with persistent oesophageal pain and required jejunostomy tube feeding to maintain nutrition. Conservative pain management strategies failed. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) was suggested, and after counseling, an electrode was placed in the high thoracic region. Stimulation covered the area of the chest pain. He achieved immediate reduced pain on swallowing water. A permanent system was implanted. In this case, SCS resulted in a significant improvement in pain on swallowing liquids. The patient can now also eat certain foods occasionally and enjoy the social aspect of eating; this was impossible previously. He feels that SCS has been worthwhile. The authors discuss the rationale for this treatment. The decision was based on the use of SCS for refractory angina, and the idea that the neural mechanisms that generate both these pain states may be similar.
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".