Bibliographic record
Abstract
ARTICLE SUMMARY A randomized study was conducted comparing two-year survival and rebleeding rates in patients with liver cirrhosis (Child-Pugh score 12 or less) receiving either transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) (n=41) or serial endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) (n=39) after initial control of bleeding. Patients with fundal varices were excluded. There was no difference in the two-year rates of survival between the groups (57% in the TIPS group compared with 56% in the EVL group), whereas the two-year rebleeding rates were 18.5% in the TIPS group and 66% in the EVL group (P<0.001). No patient who received TIPS suffered uncontrolled bleeding, whereas 11 banded patients had uncontrolled bleeding – of whom eight underwent emergency TIPS and the remaining three died. There was no difference in the rates of encephalopathy at two years between the two groups (44% in the TIPS group, 47% in the EVL group). Likewise, the numbers of days spent in hospital were similar between the two groups, both during the index bleed and over two years. The probability of shunt dysfunction in the TIPS group was 73% at two years.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.004 |
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".