MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620684053 · doi:10.1016/j.rgmxen.2017.05.001

Gallstone ileus: An overview of the literature

2017· article· es· W2620684053 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Gastroenterología de México (English Edition) · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicBiliary and Gastrointestinal Fistulas
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGallstone ileusMedicineGeneral surgeryBowel obstructionIleusGallstonesFistulaCochrane LibraryEtiologyPopulationSurgeryInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gallstone ileus represents 4% of the causes of bowel obstruction in the general population, but increases to 25% in patients above the age of 65 years. Gallstone ileus does not present with unique symptoms, making diagnosis difficult. Its management is surgical, but there is no consensus as to which of the different surgical techniques is the procedure of choice. At present, there is no recent review of this pathology. To conduct an up-to-date review of this disease. Articles published within the time frame of 2000 to 2014 were found utilizing the PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library search engines with the terms “gallstone ileus” plus “review” and the following filters: “review”, “full text”, and “humans”. The results of this review showed that gallstone ileus etiology was due to intestinal obstruction from a gallstone that migrated into the intestinal lumen through a bilioenteric fistula. The presence of 2 of the 3 Rigler's triad signs was considered diagnostic. Abdominal tomography was the imaging study of choice for gallstone ileus diagnosis and the surgical procedures for management were enterolithotomy, one-stage surgery, and two-stage surgery. Enterolithotomy had lower morbidity and mortality than the other 2 procedures. The aim of gallstone ileus treatment is to release the obstruction, which is done through enterolithotomy. It is the recommended technique for gallstone ileus management because of its lower morbidity and mortality, compared with the other techniques. El íleo biliar representa el 4% de las causas de obstrucción intestinal en la población general, pero incrementa a un 25% en los pacientes mayores a los 65 años de edad. El íleo biliar no presenta síntomas únicos, haciendo difícil su diagnóstico. Su manejo es quirúrgico, pero no hay consenso sobre cuál de las diferentes técnicas quirúrgicas es el procedimiento de elección. Actualmente, no hay una revisión reciente de esta patología. Llevar a cabo una revisión actualizada de esta enfermedad. Los artículos publicados dentro del periodo 2000-2014 se encontraron utilizando los motores de búsqueda PUBMED, EMBASE, y la Cochrane Library utilizando los términos «gallstone ileus» más «review» y los siguientes filtros fueron empleados: «review», «full text», y «humans». Los resultados de esta revisión mostraron que la etiología del íleo biliar se debió a la obstrucción intestinal ocasionada por un cálculo biliar que migró hacia el lumen intestinal a través de una fístula enterobiliar. La presencia de 2 de los 3 signos de la tríada de Rigler se consideró al momento de diagnóstico. La tomografía abdominal fue el estudio de elección para el diagnóstico del íleo biliar y los procedimientos quirúrgicos para su manejo fueron la enterolitotomía, la cirugía en un solo tiempo, y la cirugía en dos tiempos. La enterolitotomía tenía una morbimortalidad menor que los otros dos procedimientos. El objetivo del tratamiento del íleo biliar es liberar la obstrucción, obtenido a través de la enterolitotomía. Esta es la técnica recomendada para el manejo del íleo biliar debido a su morbimortalidad menor, comparada con las otras técnicas.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.273 · 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