MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135501119 · doi:10.1309/ajcp2lbrttjbf3kd

Histologic Findings and Clinical Characteristics in Acutely Symptomatic Ulcerative Colitis Patients With Superimposed <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infection

2013· article· en· W2135501119 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Wang, Larissa Matukas, Catherine Streutker

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium difficileUlcerative colitisLamina propriaBiopsyMedicineColitisPathologyGastroenterologyInternal medicineMicrobiologyBiologyEpitheliumDiseaseAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine biopsy specimens for histologic features suggestive of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: Nine patients with UC had colonic biopsy specimens taken during a symptomatic flare that coincided with positive C difficile (C difficile+) tests. Twenty-eight controls were biopsied during a UC flare but tested negative for C difficile. We reviewed the slides for evidence of pseudomembranes, ischemic-like changes, degree of colitis, and lamina propria hemorrhage. RESULTS: In C difficile+ patients, 4 (44.4%) of 9 had microscopic pseudomembranes compared with 11% in controls (P < .05). Other histologic/clinical features were not predictive. CONCLUSIONS: Although the presence of microscopic pseudomembranes suggests C difficile infection in patients with UC, sensitivity and specificity are poor; biopsy findings do not reliably detect this infection in patients with UC.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical PathologySame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207