MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095923436 · doi:10.1186/1754-9493-3-20

Safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery: Roux-en-y gastric bypass is superior to gastric banding in the management of morbidly obese patients: a reply to the response by Bhoyrul et al

2009· article· en· W2095923436 on OpenAlexaff
Ulrich Güller, Lazar V Klein, John Hagen

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Safety in Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMorbidly obeseGastric bandingGastric bypassRoux-en-Y anastomosisSurgeryRandomized controlled trialLaparoscopic adjustable gastric bandingGastric bypass surgeryWeight lossObesityGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We have read the letter by Bhoyrul et al. in response to our recently published article "Safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is superior to gastric banding in the management of morbidly obese patients". We strongly disagree with the content of the letter. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Bhoyrul et al. base their letter mostly on low level evidence such as single-institutional case series (level IV evidence) and expert opinion (level V evidence). Surprisingly, they do not comment on the randomized controlled trial, which clearly favours gastric bypass over gastric banding. CONCLUSION: The letter by Bhoyrul et al. is based on low level evidence and is itself biased, unsubstantiated, and not supported by the current literature.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0390.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Safety in SurgerySame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207