MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794795248 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy007

The Use of Balloon-assisted Enteroscopy at a Large Volume Centre: A Retrospective Analysis

2018· article· en· W2794795248 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amine Benmassaoud, Mark Sasson, Jean Caroll Pamphile, Myriam Martel, Péter L. Lakatos, Alan Barkun, Constantine A. Soulellis, Talat Bessissow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
KeywordsEnteroscopyVolume (thermodynamics)BalloonMedicineDouble-balloon enteroscopyGeneral surgeryRadiologySurgeryEndoscopyPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) is increasingly used for the evaluation of small bowel disorders. We quantified local diagnostic and therapeutic yields of BAE in patients with suspected small bowel diseases. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing BAE between January 2010 and July 2015 at McGill University Health Centre were included. Procedures were identified using a prospectively maintained database. Patients were excluded if procedure report was unavailable. Electronic medical records were reviewed. Analyses were restricted to patients who did not have a previous BAE. RESULTS: BAE was performed in 453 patients, including 421 anterograde cases. Patients had a mean age of 61.0 ± 17.5 years. Most common indications for referral were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) (n=207, 45.7%), abnormal imaging (n=88, 19.4%), suspected small bowel neoplasia (SBN) (n=39, 8.6%) and Crohn's disease (CD) (n=31, 6.8%). A diagnosis was established in 216 procedures (47.7%). A pre-endoscopic indication of CD (odds ratio [OR]: 3.78; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.60-8.90), OGIB (OR: 3.69, 95% CI, 2.03-6.71), suspected SBN (OR: 2.45; 95% CI, 1.06-5.65) and previous VCE (OR: 9.33; 95% CI, 3.24-26.90) were associated with abnormal findings. A therapeutic procedure was performed in 126 cases (28.3%). OGIB (OR: 7.00; 95% CI, 3.83-12.81), previous video capsule endoscopy (VCE) (OR: 7.86; 95% CI, 2.93-21.04) and suspected SBN (OR: 6.30; 95% CI, 2.58-21.04) were associated with performance of a therapeutic intervention. Complication rate was 1.6%, with bleeding in seven cases and one perforation. CONCLUSIONS: In carefully selected patients, such as those with OGIB, Crohn's disease and previous VCE, BAE was a safe procedure that led to the identification of abnormal findings and therapeutic interventions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207