MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2311260047

Scar masses from granulation tissue.

2016· article· en· W2311260047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asad Khan, Sandro Lanzon-Miler, Kamran Rostami

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular anomalies and interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyAscending colonUlcerative colitisGastroenterologyGeneral surgeryInternal medicineColorectal cancerInflammatory bowel diseaseOutpatient clinicPhysical examinationCancerDisease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Question A 50 years old Male known with a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis since October 2012 (Montreal Class E3) was seen for further follow up in gastroenterology outpatient. He was on Meselazine 2.4 gm per day. The last flare up he had was 2.5 years ago in April 2013 when he was treated successfully with a course of oral steroids. His colitis has been in a stable state with no further flare ups ever since. During his follow-up in Gastroenterology clinic in Sept 2015, he mentioned that he is opening his bowels 4-5/day with a consistency between watery to loose stool that was “normal” for him. He denied having significant bleeding or cramps. He also denied having a family history for colorectal cancer (CRC) or polyps. Physical examination was unremarkable. Blood test revealed a normal CRP of 7, FBC, LFTs and U &E were also normal. Further colonoscopy surveillance were organised for assessment. What is the diagnosis? What is the prognosis and appropriate management? Figure 1 Colonoscopy; distal ascending colon. The colonoscopist reported that the ascending abnormalities caused stenosis but just enough open to pass the scope getting through to the Caecum  Answer Giant Inflammatory Polyps (GIPs) in IBD.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVascular anomalies and interventionsFrench-language works237,207