MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101772952 · doi:10.1177/088307380101600617

Benign Intracranial Hypertension Associated With Budesonide Treatment in Children With Crohn's Disease

2001· article· en· W2101772952 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arie Levine, Nathan Watemberg, Hanoch Hager, Yoram Bujanover, Ami Ballin, Tally Lerman‐Sagie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBudesonideMedicineCrohn's diseasePediatricsDiseaseBrain diseaseInternal medicineCorticosteroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oral budesonide in adult studies is a potent corticosteroid with decreased systemic bioavailability and an improved adverse effect profile in comparison with prednisone. It has recently been introduced for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease in Europe, Canada, and Israel. Benign intracranial hypertension has rarely been associated with corticosteroid therapy but has not been reported in association with budesonide therapy. Three adolescents with Crohn's disease and poor nutritional status developed benign intracranial hypertension while receiving oral budesonide. All three patients had previously received multiple courses of prednisone during the course of their disease, without developing intracranial hypertension. Benign intracranial hypertension resolved after medication withdrawal and did not recur with subsequent use of prednisone. Evaluation for benign intracranial hypertension should be considered in patients with inflammatory bowel disease who develop headache while receiving oral budesonide. This side effect may be associated with poor nutritional status.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207