MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162236213 · doi:10.1177/0009922813506255

Intussusception in Children Presenting to the Emergency Department

2013· article· en· W2162236213 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pediatrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntussusception (medical disorder)Emergency departmentGastrostomy tubeCryingAbdominal painPediatricsIncidence (geometry)Tertiary careBowel resectionGastrostomySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A retrospective chart review of children diagnosed with intussusceptions from March 2005 to March 2007 was conducted at a tertiary care pediatric hospital. There were 152 children with 170 episodes of intussusceptions during the study period. Around one third (30%) of children diagnosed with intussusceptions had a concurrent infection. There were 114 large bowel intussusceptions, with a mean age of 27 months (SD = 25) and a success rate of 91% for air enema reductions. Bowel resection was performed in 8.8% of children with large bowel intussusceptions. Small bowel intussusceptions (n = 38) were associated with gastrostomy tubes in 42% (n = 16) of patients, and 81% needed tube shortening. The varying age range of many children diagnosed with intussusceptions and the high incidence of intercurrent illnesses and fever in our study alert health professionals to suspect intussusceptions in children presenting with abdominal pain or crying.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.349
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