MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742027958 · doi:10.5858/arpa.2016-0608-ra

Celiac Disease and Other Causes of Duodenitis

2017· review· en· W2742027958 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel R Owen, David Owen

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuodenitisMedicineDuodenumVillous atrophyTissue transglutaminaseDiseaseBiopsyPathologyGastroenterologyCoeliac diseaseInternal medicineGastritisStomach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: - Patients who receive an upper gastrointestinal endoscopic examination frequently have biopsies taken from the duodenum. Accurate interpretation of duodenal biopsies is essential for patient care. Celiac disease is a common clinical concern, but pathologists need to be aware of other conditions of the duodenum that mimic celiac disease. OBJECTIVE: - To review the normal histologic features of duodenal mucosa and describe the clinical and histologic findings in celiac disease and its mimics, listing the differentiating features of biopsies with villous atrophy and epithelial lymphocytosis. DATA SOURCES: - The study comprises a literature review of pertinent publications as of November 30, 2016. CONCLUSIONS: - Celiac disease is a common cause of abnormal duodenal histology. However, many of the histologic features found in the duodenal biopsy of patients with celiac disease are also present in other conditions that affect the small bowel. Diagnostic precision may be enhanced by obtaining a careful patient history and by ancillary laboratory testing, particularly for the presence of antitissue transglutaminase antibodies.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory MedicineSame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207