MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quality of defoamer enema combined with bellym assage on the colonic preparation in elderly patients with constipation

2017· article· en· W3030474325 on OpenAlex
Tao Gao, Rong-Yao Liu, Xuezhi Chen

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œJournal of practical nursing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnemaMedicineAbdominal distensionDefecationConstipationColonoscopyGastroenterologyInternal medicineAbdominal painSignificant differenceCatharticSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To explore the role of defoamer enema combined with bellym assage on the colonic preparation in elderly patients with constipation. Methods One hundred patients were divided into two groups by random number table method, the experimental group and the control group with 50 cases each. Patients in the control group were told to drink polyethyleneglycolelectrolytesolution 3 000 ml. Patients in the experimental group were told to drink polyethyleneglycolelectrolytesolution 2 000 ml. After medicinepre paration, the patients of experimental group were given defoamer enema. After that, they were undertaken counterclockwise massage for10 mins, then massageing clockwise until defecation. Results 14 patients with oral catharsis drugs failed to give up check, 46 cases of intervention group and 40 cases of control group finally complete intestinal preparation and colonoscopy. Intervention group patients after bowel preparation before the incidence of abdominal distension, abdominal pain were 6.52% (3/46), 8.70%(4/46), lower than the control group 65.00% (26/40), 25.00% (10/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2= 32.74, 4.17, P< 0.05). Percent of pass was 65.22%(30/46) for intestinal preparation intervention group, significantly higher than the control group 35.00% (14/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2= 7.82, P< 0.05). Intervention group intestinal cleanliness ratings of Ottawa total score was 4.00 (4.00), which was lower than the control group7.00 (4.50), the difference was statistically significant (Z= 3.80, P< 0.05). Endoscopic check process, the intervention group arrived at the terminal ileum and mirror back time were 7.00 (3.00) and 9.00 (1.00) min, were less than 9.00(6.50) and 10.50 (3.00) min in the control group, the difference was statistically significant (Z= 2.09, 4.53, P< 0.05). Intervention group of colons polyps detection rate was 67.39% (31/46), higher than that of control group 30.00% (12/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2= 11.97, P< 0.05). Conclusions The bowel preparation with defoamer enema will enhance the intestinal tract cleaness and the detection rate of polyps in elderly patients with constipation. Key words: Aged; Constipation; Retention enema; Colonoscopy; Colonic preparation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.330 · 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