MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316049179 · doi:10.4253/wjge.v6.i11.513

Endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary and pancreatic duct interventions

2014· review· en· W2316049179 on OpenAlexaff
David O. Prichard

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneousEndoscopic ultrasoundPancreatic ductRadiologyEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyPsychological interventionBile ductComplicationUltrasoundSurgeryGeneral surgeryPancreatitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography fails to decompress the pancreatic or biliary system, alternative interventions are required. In this situation, endosonography guided cholangio-pancreatography (ESCP), percutaneous radiological therapy or surgery can be considered. Small case series reporting the initial experience with ESCP have been superseded by comprehensive reports of large cohorts. Although these reports are predominantly retrospective, they demonstrate that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided biliary and pancreatic interventions are associated with high levels of technical and clinical success. The procedural complication rates are lower than those seen with percutaneous therapy or surgery. This article describes and discusses data published in the last five years relating to EUS-guided biliary and pancreatic intervention.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Gastrointestinal EndoscopySame topicGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersFrench-language works237,207