A Multi-disciplinary Approach to Gastrointestinal Malignancies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicholas Fidelman, MD R. Peter Lokken, MD The third quarterly issue of Digestive Disease Interventions is dedicated to topics related to treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies and their complications. The issue opens with a detailed guidance from the team at McGill University in Canada on nerve blocks performed for treatment of abdominal pain and for improvement of periprocedural analgesia for patients undergoing procedures via the transhepatic route. This practice changing report is followed by a detailed discussion (3 manuscripts) on epidemiology, prevention diagnosis, and treatment of venous thromboembolic disease in the setting of malignancy from the world-renowned authorities at University of Pennsylvania and Washington University in St. Louis. The issue also revisits the role of visceral transplantation for patients with cancer (Fujiki et al.), summarizes current thinking regarding liver-directed therapy for metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (Gonzalez-Aguirre A and Ziv E), and provides new insights into resection and ablation for liver tumors (Eskander et al. and Chen et al.). The remainder of the issue discusses treatment of complications of gastrointestinal cancers including malignant bowel obstruction (Litwin et al.), biliary obstruction (Golowa et al.), and ascites (Elsakka and Yarmohammadi). The manuscripts included in this issue of Digestive Disease Interventions Journal were authored by the global thought leaders in the field of interventional oncology, and provide state-of-the-art literature and practice updates. Publication History Article published online: 26 October 2020 © 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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".