Simple Clinical Predictors May Obviate Urgent Endoscopy in Selected Patients With Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Bleeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The validated Blatchford risk score (BRS) predicts outcomes in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, before endoscopy; completion of the Rockall score requires endoscopy. The aims of this study were to predict whether the modified BRS (mBRS) can predict (1) endoscopic high-risk stigmata (HRS) and (2) rebleeding and mortality. METHODS: Clinical and demographic characteristics on 1869 patients from 6 Canadian provinces were prospectively entered into the Registry for Upper GI Bleeding and Endoscopy database, recording 30-day rebleeding and mortality. The Rockall score and mBRS (hemoglobin level, hemodynamic instability, and presence of melena, liver disease, or cardiac failure; urea and syncope were not recorded) were calculated. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between an mBRS of 1 or less with HRS and with rebleeding and mortality. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of the patients was 66 (17) years, with 62% men and a mean of 2.5 comorbidities. Of the 1860 patients with 30-day rebleeding data, 334 (18.0%) rebled; 5.3% died. The mBRS was 0 in 3% and 1 or less in 9.8% of patients; HRS were seen in 31.0% of patients. An mBRS of 1 or less was associated with lower rebleeding (5% vs 19%; P<.001) and mortality (0.5% vs 5.8%; P=.003), and was significant in multivariate analysis for rebleeding (odds ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.48) and mortality (odds ratio, 0.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.90). The HRS were less frequent when the mBRS was 1 or less (16.9% vs 32.7%; odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-0.6). Patients with a low mBRS with HRS had a low rebleeding rate (3.3%) and a lower apparent benefit from endoscopic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: An mBRS of 1 or less identifies approximately 10% of patients with gastrointestinal tract bleeding with a low likelihood of having HRS and a low risk of adverse outcomes. A prospective randomized study is required to examine whether this subgroup of patients presenting after hours could be discharged safely from emergency departments with arrangements for (urgent) outpatient endoscopy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".