European Paediatric Surgeons' Association Survey on the Management of Pediatric Appendicitis
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
AIM: To define patterns in the management of pediatric appendicitis. METHODS: A total of 169 delegates from 42 (24 European) countries completed a validated survey administered at the EUPSA 2017 annual congress. RESULTS: In the work-up of children with suspected acute appendicitis, most surgeons rely on full blood count (92%), C-reactive protein (82%), and abdominal ultrasonography (76%), but rarely on computed tomography scans or magnetic resonance imaging. In suspected simple appendicitis, most surgeons (76%) do not perform appendectomy at night in clinically stable patients and start antibiotic preoperatively (64%), but only 15% offer antibiotic therapy alone (no appendectomy). In suspected perforated appendicitis, 96% start antibiotic preoperatively, and 92% perform an appendectomy. Presence of phlegmon/abscess is the main contraindication to immediate surgery. In case of appendix mass, most responders (75%) favor a conservative approach and perform interval appendectomy always (56%) or in selected cases (38%) between 2 and 6 months from the first episode (81%). Children with large intraperitoneal abscesses are managed by percutaneous drainage (59% responders) and by surgery (37% responders). Laparoscopy is the preferred surgical approach for both simple (89%) and perforated appendicitis (81%). Most surgeons send the appendix for histology (96%) and pus for microbiology, if present (78%). At the end of the operation, 58% irrigate the abdominal cavity only if contaminated using saline solution (93%). In selected cases, 52% leave a drain in situ. CONCLUSION: Some aspects of appendicitis management lack consensus, particularly appendix mass and intraperitoneal abscess. Evidence-based guidelines should be developed, which may help standardize care and improve clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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