MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3096927251 · doi:10.14740/jocmr4331

Relationship Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Endoscopic Finding “Iodine-Unstained Streak”

2020· article· en· W3096927251 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kazu Hamada, Ken Kawaura, Hidekazu Kitakata, Hiroaki Kuno, Junji Kamai, Rika Kobayasi, Sadahumi Azukisawa, Taishi Ishisaka, Yuta Igarashi, Kumie Kodera, Tazuo Okuno, Takuro Morita, Taroh Himeno, Hiroshi Yano, Toshihiro Higashikawa, Osamu Iritani, Kunimitsu Iwai, Shigeto Morimoto, Masashi Okuro

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGERDMedicineRefluxIodineStreakGastroenterologyEsophagusEsophagitisInternal medicineEsophagogastroduodenoscopyEndoscopyPathologyDiseaseChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with iodine stain is a useful and diffused method for diagnosing esophageal cancer. We can perform the procedure easily with endoscopic system which does not comprise image-enhanced endoscopy. Several studies advocated that iodine-unstained streaks are a characteristic finding of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, there are only a few reports about the subject. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of iodine chromoendoscopy for GERD consultation. METHODS: The study was conducted with 154 GERD cases in which EGD with iodine stain to the esophagus was performed. For the 154 cases, we analyzed the existence of reflux esophagitis finding and iodine-unstained streaks. In 47 GERD cases (proton pump inhibitor (PPI): 45 cases, histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2-RA): two cases) where medication was started after EGD, we examined predictive factors of the symptom improvement such as sex, age, weight, reflux esophagitis finding, and iodine-unstained streak. RESULTS: An iodine-unstained streak was observed in 50/154 cases (32.5%). For 50 cases with iodine-unstained streak, there were only 24/50 cases (48.0%) that had both reflux esophagitis findings (≥ Los Angeles classification: grade M) and an iodine-unstained streak. For 47 cases in which medication was started, 34 cases showed improvement in their symptoms, and 13 cases did not show improvement. An iodine-unstained streak was observed more often in "Improved" group rather than in "Not improved" group (P < 0.01). When we supposed an iodine-unstained streak to be the predictive factor of the medication effect for GERD, sensitivity was 61.8% and specificity was 84.6%. CONCLUSIONS: No erosion was often found in the GERD cases without reflux esophagitis, and iodine-unstained streak was observed more often in "Improved" group rather than in "Not improved" group. We think that iodine-unstained streak can be useful for diagnosing of GERD and predictive factor of the medication effect.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.463
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.098 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments→French-language works237,207→