MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108825621 · doi:10.1177/2050640613487194

Fistulizing Crohn’s disease: Diagnosis and management

2013· article· en· W2108825621 on OpenAlexaff
K Gecse, Reena Khanna, Jaap Stoker, John T. Jenkins, Simon Gabe, Dieter Hahnloser, Geert D’Haens

Bibliographic record

VenueUnited European Gastroenterology Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnterocutaneous fistulaCrohn's diseaseFistulaProctitisAbscessStoma (medicine)Inflammatory bowel diseaseInfliximabDiseaseSurgeryGeneral surgeryIntensive care medicineUlcerative colitisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fistulizing Crohn's disease represents an evolving, yet unresolved, issue for multidisciplinary management. Perianal fistulas are the most frequent findings in fistulizing Crohn's disease. While enterocutaneous fistulas are rare, they are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Detailed evaluation of the fistula tract by advanced imaging techniques is required to determine the most suitable management options. The fundamentals of perianal fistula management are to evaluate the complexity of the fistula tract, and exclude proctitis and associated abscess. The main goals of the treatment are abscess drainage, which is mandatory, before initiating immunosuppressive medical therapy, resolution of fistula discharge, preservation of continence and, in the long term, avoidance of proctectomy with permanent stoma. The management of enterocutaneous fistulas comprises of sepsis control, skin care, nutritional optimization and, if needed, delayed surgery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnited European Gastroenterology JournalSame topicAnorectal Disease Treatments and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207