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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to assess patients treated for esophageal foreign bodies. The charts of patients (n=177), between January 1994 and April 2009, were investigated retrospectively. Patients' age and gender, locations and types of foreign bodies (FBs) and interventions were taken into consideration. Fifty-seven percent of the patients were male. The youngest patient was 6 months, whereas the oldest was 83 years old. The median age was 9 years. Half of the patients were in their first decade. Treatment took place 11 h (ranging from 1 to 120 h) after impaction of the FB. One hundred fifty-two FBs were removed in 177 patients. Our negative esophagoscopy (n=25) rate was 14%. The FBs were radiopaque in 75% (n=114) and were commonly (71%; n=109) located in the cervical esophagus. Metallic coins (n=81-53%) were the most commonly observed inorganic FB while bones and/or meat impaction (n=54-35%) were the most frequent organic FB. A total of 182 endoscopic interventions were performed on these patients. One hundred eleven of them were esophagoscopy and the remaining 71 were direct laryngoscopy. The FB was pushed into the stomach in 11 patients. Our morbidity rate was 1.6% (n=3). Iatrogenic perforation occurred in two patients. There was no mortality. Esophageal FBs may vary in type: sharp or round objects, metallic, plastic or organic material. FBs are commonly found at pharyngoesophageal junction and usually removed by McGill forceps. Rigid esophagoscopy is used for children and adults because of its large working channel. Rigid instruments are considered reliable and safe for extracting foreign bodies.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it