Pancreas Divisum in Pediatric Acute Recurrent and Chronic Pancreatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The significance of pancreas divisum (PD) as a risk factor for pancreatitis is controversial. We analyzed the characteristics of children with PD associated with acute recurrent or chronic pancreatitis to better understand its impact. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared children with or without PD in the well-phenotyped INSPPIRE (INternational Study group of Pediatric Pancreatitis: In search for a cuRE) cohort. Differences were analyzed using 2-sample t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables, Pearson χ or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS: PD was found in 52 of 359 (14.5%) subjects, a higher prevalence than the general population (∼7%). Females more commonly had PD (71% vs. 55%; P=0.02). Children with PD did not have a higher incidence of mutations in SPINK1, CFTR, CTRC compared with children with no PD. Children with PD were less likely to have PRSS1 mutations (10% vs. 34%; P<0.01) or a family history of pancreatitis (P<0.05), and more likely to have hypertriglyceridemia (11% vs. 3%; P=0.03). Children with PD underwent significantly more endoscopic procedures and pancreatic sphincterotomy. Patients with PD had fewer attacks of acute pancreatitis (P=0.03) and were less likely to develop exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (P=0.01). Therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was considered most helpful if pancreatic duct was impacted with stones (83% helpful). CONCLUSIONS: PD is likely a risk factor for acute recurrent pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis in children that appears to act independently of genetic risk factors. Patients with PD and stones obstructing the pancreatic duct benefit most from therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".