Two-year retrospective analysis of patients undergoing direct to procedure flexible sigmoidoscopy investigation with rectal bleeding as a primary complaint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and aims Rectal bleeding affects ~15 % of the general population and is a common reason for referral to gastroenterologists by primary care physicians. Direct to procedure flexible sigmoidoscopy is an appealing modality to investigate rectal bleeding due its diagnostic yield, safety profile, and accessibility. Patients referred on a routine basis for direct to procedure clinic by primary care physicians with the sole complaint of rectal bleeding have not previously been studied. Our study aims to explore the spectrum of diagnoses and evaluate for potential clinical predictors of underlying pathology in this specific patient population. Methods In total, 528 charts of patients referred to the Kingston General Hospital and Hotel Dieu Hospital endoscopy units (Kingston, Canada) with the sole complaint of rectal bleeding were reviewed. All of these patients were referred on a routine basis to direct to procedure clinic from primary care physicians. The performance of various clinical variables in predicting significant pathology was assessed by univariate analysis. Results The diagnostic spectrum of the cohort studied included hemorrhoids (75.5 %), anal fissures (4 %), ulcerative colitis (3.2 %), Crohn’s disease (1.1 %), indeterminate proctitis/colitis (1.7 %), and colorectal malignancy (2.7 %). Of the various clinical variables assessed, only male sex predicted significant pathology (25.2 % of males vs 17.6 % of females, P < 0.05). Conclusion Our study highlights the need for a thorough investigation of rectal bleeding given the lack of clinical predictors. Future prospective studies with more patients are needed to fully assess the utility of various clinical variables in predicting pathology in this patient population. This would allow for more effective triaging of a routine rectal bleeding, a very common reason for patient referral to gastroenterologists by primary care physicians. Flexible sigmoidoscopy was not associated with complications or missed diagnosis in our study. As such, the technique appears to be a suitable initial investigative modality for patients with rectal bleeding.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".