MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087880249 · doi:10.1542/peds.111.1.158

Rumination Syndrome in Children and Adolescents: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis

2003· article· en· W2087880249 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersNIH Clinical CenterNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMedicineRuminationRegurgitation (circulation)Abdominal painNauseaConstipationPediatricsMedical recordInternal medicineVomitingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the clinical features, results of diagnostic testing, and treatment outcomes for children and adolescents with rumination syndrome. METHODS: Review of the medical records for all 147 patients ages 5 to 20 diagnosed with rumination syndrome at our institution between 1975 and 2000. Data are presented as mean +/- the standard error of the mean. RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent were female. Age at diagnosis was 15.0 +/- 0.3 years. Symptom duration before diagnosis was 2.2 +/- 0.3 years, 73% missed school/work, and 46% had been hospitalized because of symptoms. Before diagnosis, 16 (11%) underwent surgery for evaluation or management of symptoms. Twenty-four (16%) had psychiatric disorders; 3.4% had anorexia or bulimia nervosa. All patients described postprandial regurgitation after almost every meal (2.7 +/- 0.1 meals per day). Weight loss was described by 42.2% (median: 7 kg). Additional symptoms included: abdominal pain, 38%; constipation, 21%; nausea, 17%; and diarrhea, 8%. Structural studies were normal. Gastric emptying of solids at 4 hours was delayed in 26 of 56 patients. Esophageal pH testing in 24 patients showed reflux/regurgitation in 54%. Gastroduodenal manometry in 65 patients showed characteristic rumination-waves in 40%. Outcome data (at median follow-up 10 months) were available for 54 patients. Symptoms resolved in 16 (30%) and improved in 30 (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Recognition of the clinical features of rumination syndrome in children and adolescents is essential; the diagnosis is often delayed and associated with morbidity. Extensive diagnostic testing is unnecessary. Early behavioral therapy is advocated, and patient outcomes are generally favorable.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.239 · 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