MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007043953 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz047.195

A196 INCIDENCE OF PEDIATRIC EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS IN EDMONTON ZONE AND RISK OF STRICTURING AT DIAGNOSIS

2020· article· en· W3007043953 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Burnett, Rabindranath Persad, Hien Q. Huynh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilic esophagitisMedicineIncidence (geometry)Medical recordEndoscopyBiopsyPediatricsInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a common cause of esophageal dysfunction in children. A subset of children have a more severe phenotype of EoE, complicated by esophageal stricturing. Limited work has been done to characterize this phenotype. Aims To determine the incidence of EoE, and the frequency of esophageal stricturing in pediatric EoE. Methods We retrospectively identified all new cases of EoE at the Stollery Children’s Hospital from 2015–2018 using esophageal biopsy reports for the province of Alberta (CoPath database), EoE clinic lists and an OR database for esophageal dilatation at the Stollery. Electronic medical records (EMR) were reviewed to confirm EoE diagnosis. For each confirmed case, clinical data was captured from the outpatient EMR and gastroscopy/pathology reports. A review of peri-endoscopy OR/nursing charts was performed on a subset of patients (n=75) to capture scope adverse event. Statistics Canada 2016 census data was used to calculate incidence rates. Results 185 new cases of EoE were diagnosed at our center during the study period (see table). For patients < 15 years old living in Edmonton zone (n=73), the incidence over the 4 years was 11.1 cases per 100,000 person years {8.7 (0–4 year-old), 7.6 (5–9 year old), and 18.1 (10–14 year old)}. There was limited variation in incidence in the 4 years (9.1–12.1 per 100,000 person years). 8 of 185 (4%) patients had endoscopically confirmed esophageal strictures, 4 of which required mechanical dilation (mean 3.75 dilations per patient, range 1–6). 11/185 (5.9%) patients had more subtle signs of esophageal narrowing, but no strictures. No perforations or episodes of significant bleeding were reported in peri-endoscopy charts reviewed for 239 gastroscopes, including 16 dilations. Pain was reported after 15% of all scopes, including 50% of the 28 scopes with strictures and 63% of the 16 scopes involving dilations. Conclusions Edmonton zone has one of the highest incidences of EoE reported in children. In this cohort, 4% had esophageal stricture (half required dilatation) and 5.9% had more subtle narrowing. Patients with strictures were older, had more frequent food impaction and longer duration of symptoms (Table). This data will be included in an ongoing multicenter case-control study across Canada. Funding Agencies CAGWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute (Univ. Alberta)

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 score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207