MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200526790 · doi:10.3390/life11121415

An Unusual Presentation of Crohn’s Disease Diagnosed Following Accidental Ingestion of Fruit Pits: Report of Two Cases and Review of the Literature

2021· article· en· W4200526790 on OpenAlexaff
Emanuele Sinagra, Dario Raimondo, Salvatore Marco Iacopinelli, Francesca Rossi, Giuseppe Conoscenti, Maria Angela Di Maggio, Sergio Testai, Rita Alloro, Marta Marasà, Alberto Calandra, Claudia Costanza, Serena Cristofalo, Socrate Pallio, Marcello Maida, Ilaria Tarantino, Goffredo Arena

Bibliographic record

VenueLife · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)IngestionDiseaseSubclinical infectionCrohn's diseaseEndoscopyStenosisBowel obstructionSurgeryGastroenterologyAccidentalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical course of Crohn's disease (CD) is often complicated by intestinal strictures, which can be fibrotic, inflammatory, or mixed, therefore leading to stenosis and eventually symptomatic obstruction. We report two cases of subclinical CD diagnosed after fruit pit ingestion, causing bowel obstruction; additionally, we conducted a narrative review of the scientific literature on cases of intestinal obstruction secondary to impacted bezoars due to fruit pits. Symptoms of gastrointestinal bezoars in CD patients are not diagnostic; and the diagnosis should be based on a combined assessment of history, clinical presentation, imaging examination and endoscopy findings. This report corroborates the concept that CD patients are at a greater risk of bowel obstruction with bezoars generally and shows that accidental ingestion of fruit pits may lead to an unusual presentation of the disease. Therapeutic options in this group of patients differ from the usual approaches implemented in other patients with strictures secondary to CD.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLifeSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207