Perspectives on endoscopic surveillance of dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease: a survey of academic gastroenterologists
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Dye-based chromoendoscopy (DBC) is the preferred method for endoscopic dysplasia surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We sought to examine the uptake of, and perception toward DBC among academic gastroenterologists. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of academic members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology to assess their current dysplasia surveillance practice, uptake of DBC, and perceived barriers to adoption of DBC. RESULTS: Of the 150 physicians contacted, 49 (32.7 %) responded to the survey. The majority of respondents reported subspecialty training in IBD (71.4 %), and the median number of years in practice was 12. White-light endoscopy with random colonic biopsies was the preferred dysplasia screening method (73.5 %). Only 26.5 % of respondents routinely used DBC, despite institutional availability of over 60 %. The major barriers to adoption of DBC were concerns about procedure duration (46.9 %), concerns about cost (44.9 %), and inadequate training (40.8 %). CONCLUSION: There is low uptake of DBC for dysplasia surveillance in IBD patients among academic gastroenterologists practicing in Canada. Additional studies should be completed to determine how to improve the uptake of DBC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it