MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947190363 · doi:10.1093/dote/29.3.288

O-10 (11:50 to 12:02): Prevalence of Barrett Esophagus in Adolescents and Young Adults With Esophageal Atresia

2016· article· en· W2947190363 on OpenAlexaff
A. Schneider, F. Gottrand, Michel Bellaiche, F. Becmeur, A. Lachaux, A. Dabadie, Julia Michel, Christophe Fauré, P. Philippe, Yvan Vandenplas, C. Dupont, A Breton, J. Gaudin, T. Lamireau, Laurence Muyshont, Guillaume Podevin, S. Viola, Valérie Bertrand, D. Caldari, Séverine Colinet, Étienne Sokal, Erik Sauleau, Emmanuelle Leteurtre, L. Michaud

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Esophagus · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtresiaEsophagusBarrett's esophagusGastroenterologyInternal medicineAdenocarcinomaCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To study the prevalence of Barrett esophagus (BE) (gastric and/or intestinal metaplasia) in adolescents treated for esophageal atresia (EA). This multicentric, prospective study included patients 15 to 19 year-old with medical history of EA. An upper endoscopy with standardized esophageal staged biopsies (at least 12) under general anesthesia was performed. Histological suspicion of metaplasia benefited from a centralized confirmation. 120 patients aged 16.5 years (Â ± 1.4) were included. At evaluation, 8% had denutrition, 41% had an anti-reflux surgery performed and 41% had GERD symptoms with only 28% under medical treatment. Esophagitis was found at endoscopy in 34% and confirmed at histology in 67%. Endoscopy suspected BE in 37%, confirmed at histology in 43% (50 gastric and 1 intestinal). No endoscopic nor histological anomalies were found at the anastomosis. No significant relationships were found between BE and clinical symptoms. Multivariate analysis showed that BE was associated to EA without fistula (p = 0.03; OR = 0.21 [0.05–0.87]); previous multiple antireflux surgery (p = 0.04; OR = 3.29 [1.08–10.07]); BE suspicion at endoscopy (p < 0.001; OR = 0.04 [0.01–0.18]); histological esophagitis (p = 0.02; OR = 0.17 [0.04–0.73]). Patients with EA are at high risk of persistent GERD and BE. Long-time systematic follow-up of the esophageal mucosa including multistaged biopsies is therefore required even in asymptomatic patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the EsophagusSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207