P-38: Risk Factors for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children with Esophageal Atresia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is reported in esophageal atresia (EA) but risk factors are unknown. 31 children (16M/15F) with EA underwent diagnostic upper endoscopy (1 y to 16 y, mean age 6 y) and records were reviewed for risk factors including estimated gestational age (EGA), mode of delivery, anastomotic dilation, family history of atopy, neonatal milk type, inhaled steroid use, tracheomalacia and aspiration pneumonia. 10 (32%) were diagnosed with EoE. Male gender was more common in the EoE group: 8 vs 2 (80% vs 20%). There was no difference in family history of atopy, EGA, mode of delivery, use of breast milk or presence of gastrostomy. Tracheomalacia affected 9 of 21 (48%) non-EoE vs 7 of 10 (70%) EoE; aspiration pneumonia 67% non-EoE vs 30% EoE. Age of initial dilation was later in EoE and 25% were >2 y at first dilation. Inhaled steroid exposure under 2 y of age was higher in the non-EoE group 10 of 19 (52%) vs 1/10 (10%). Steroid use at time of endoscopy was low in both groups (24% vs 22%) so unlikely to have a treatment effect for EoE. 32% of our EA subjects had a diagnosis of EoE. Male sex was a risk factor for EoE but there was no difference in family history of atopy. Early exposure to topical steroid was more common in the non-EoE group. Whether early topical steroid is somehow protective from EoE is not clear, as our numbers are small, but this observation needs further follow up.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".