MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338569941

Argon plasma coagulation and the future applications for dual-mode endoscopic probes.

2006· article· en· W2338569941 on OpenAlexaff
Jerome Canady, Kimberly Wiley, Biagio Ravo

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgon plasma coagulationMedicineEndoscopic mucosal resectionEndoscopyTherapeutic endoscopyPolypectomySurgeryFistulaAnastomosisGeneral surgeryInternal medicineColonoscopyCancerColorectal cancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Argon plasma coagulation (APC) is a thermoablative technique increasingly being used in endoscopy. Since its introduction, the flexible APC probe has been employed by endoscopists throughout the world. APC has helped change the endoscopic management of many gastrointestinal (GI) diseases, including hemorrhagic proctitis, watermelon stomach, bleeding peptic ulcer, and colonic varices. Endoscopists and surgeons are creatively combining standard and new electrosurgical techniques with APC. For instance, APC used in combination with piecemeal polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, balloon dilatation for strictures, and plasma welding of bleeding vessels after sclerotherapy injection are among the recent innovative techniques reported. Other emerging innovations using APC that are being considered include endoscopic en bloc resection of mucosal and submucosal tumors of the GI tract, endoscopic mucosal resection supplemented with APC for high-grade dysplasia and early GI cancers, endoscopic repair of anastomotic strictures, and welding GI fistula tracts. As such, endoscopists require more efficient and cost-effective multifunctional thermoablative probes. This review discusses the development and the potential application of dual-mode plasma endoscopic probes in fulfilling these emerging needs.

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 score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207