MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418836794

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in children with biliary atresia.

2000· article· en· W2418836794 on OpenAlexaff
Hideo Horigome, Tomoyuki Nomura, Katsuhisa Saso, Takashi Hashimoto, Tatsuya Suzuki, Takashi Joh, Hirotaka Ohara, Shinji Akita, Satoshi Sobue, Yaichi Mizuno, Yukimasa Kato, Hitoshi Ohmi, Makoto Itoh

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiliary atresiaMedicineSclerotherapyVaricesGastric varicesFluoroscopyEsophageal varicesEsophagusGastroenterologyAtresiaPortal hypertensionInternal medicineRadiologySurgeryCirrhosis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To determine the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) for children with biliary atresia. METHODOLOGY: Subjects were 7 patients with biliary atresia with esophagogastric varices and variceal bleeding. Intravariceal injection using 5% ethanolamine oleate was performed under fluoroscopy until varices were eradicated. RESULTS: Endoscopic examination revealed that bleeding occurred in the junctional gastric varices in most of the cases. The mean number of EIS sessions required for obliteration of the varices was 2.3. In the observation period (mean: 21 months), recurrent esophagogastric varices occurred in 2 patients. One had variceal bleeding that was treated successfully by additional EIS. There were no severe complications associated with EIS. CONCLUSIONS: EIS under fluoroscopy was safe and effective for variceal bleeding in children with biliary atresia.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207