MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128884684 · doi:10.3748/wjg.v27.i5.428

Noninferiority clinical trial comparing the bowel cleansing efficacy of sodium phosphate tablets (Quiklean<sup>®</sup>) with a polyethylene glycol/bisacodyl kit

2021· article· en· W3128884684 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shih‐Ya Hung, Hung‐Chang Chen, Tao‐Wei Ke, Jiann‐Hwa Chen, Koung-Hung Hsiao, Hwei‐Ming Wang, Hua-Che Chiang, Sheng‐Chi Chang, Yi‐Chang Chen, Ming-Hao Hsieh, Yuan‐Yao Tsai, Yo-Wen Hsieh, William Tzu‐Liang Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBisacodylPolyethylene glycolMedicineCatharticBowel preparationGastroenterologyChemistryInternal medicineColonoscopyNuclear chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Efficient bowel cleansing is essential for a successful colonoscopy, but the ideal cleansing agent, volume, and pharmaceutical dosage form have yet to be determined. Small-volume cleansers enhance patient compliance. AIM: ) under identical dietary recommendations. METHODS: = 220). After bowel preparation, a colonoscopist performed the colonoscopy with video recorded for rating. The primary efficacy endpoint was the bowel cleansing quality using the Aronchick Scale. The secondary endpoints were the bowel cleansing efficacy of three colon segments, tolerability and acceptability, safety using the Ottawa bowel preparation scale, questionnaires by subjects, and monitoring of adverse events. RESULTS: . CONCLUSION: is sodium phosphate tablets available on Taiwan's market for bowel preparation; it potentially offers patients an alternative to standard large-volume bowel preparation regimens and may, therefore, increase positive attitudes toward colonoscopies and participation rates.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of GastroenterologySame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207