Investigation of small intestinal lesions in dialysis patients using capsule endoscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although gastrointestinal hemorrhage is an important complication for dialysis patients, the details of many points remain unclear with regard to small intestinal lesions. METHODS: Capsule endoscopy was performed in fecal occult blood-positive dialysis (n =16) and non-dialysis (n = 20) patients after upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopies failed to reveal hemorrhagic lesions. FINDINGS: Erosive lesions were observed in 50.0% (8/16) and 25.0% (5/20) of the dialysis and non-dialysis groups, respectively. Vascular lesions were observed in 62.5% (10/16) and 25.0% (5/20), respectively. Vascular lesions were observed at a significantly higher rate in the dialysis patients (P = 0.041), but no significant difference was noted in erosive lesions (P = 0.188). Of patients taking proton pump inhibitor (PPI), Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs, and antiplatelet drugs, only oral PPI administration was associated with vascular lesions (P = 0.02). DISCUSSION: In dialysis patients, vascular lesions are the most common among small intestinal lesions, suggesting that they may have caused previously unexplained gastrointestinal hemorrhage in dialysis patients. It was also suggested that the frequent use of PPI may be a cause of small intestinal lesions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".