MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085060503 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1716725

Surgical Management of Rectal Prolapse in Infants and Children

2020· review· en· W3085060503 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pediatric Surgery · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRectal prolapseEtiologyConstipationPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)General surgeryPediatricsSurgeryRectumInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The surgical management of children with rectal prolapse is wide ranging and without consensus within the pediatric surgical community. While the majority of rectal prolapse in infants and children resolves spontaneously or with the medical management of constipation, a small but significant subset of patients may require intervention for persistent symptoms. In this review, we discuss the etiology and pathophysiology of rectal prolapse in both infants and children, options for medical management, described interventions and surgical options and their outcomes, and future avenues for research and investigation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.256 · 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