The Evolution of Dieulafoy's Lesion Since 1897: Then and Now—A Journey through the Lens of a Pediatric Lesion with Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. In 1897, Dieulafoy was the first to characterize a gaping arteriole within the gastric mucosa causing massive hematemesis, designating it as "exulceratio simplex." A hundred years later, this vascular abnormality, now commonly referred to as a "Dieulafoy lesion," has been identified through the entire gastrointestinal tract and the bronchus. Objectives and Methods. As the original findings have been subjected to revisions and modifications by modern authors, Dieulafoy's original paper was reviewed and analyzed. The evolution of the current usage of "Dieulafoy's lesion" in the literature has been summarized with comparisons to the original report. Additionally, an index case of a 10-year-old female with a gastric "exulceratio simplex" is reported with a review of previously reported paediatric Dieulafoy lesions. Conclusions. The term "Dieulafoy lesion" in modern literature no longer adheres to the initial conclusions with regards to its origin, demographics, and presenting symptoms. Dieulafoy lesions remain a rare cause of gastrointestinal bleeding that can cause life-threatening haemorrhages in children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".