MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249713769 · doi:10.1155/2003/759387

Biliary Pancreatitis

2003· review· en· W4249713769 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David L. Carr‐Locke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyMagnetic resonance cholangiopancreatographyPancreatitisCommon bile ductAcute pancreatitisCholecystectomyGeneral surgeryRandomized controlled trialRadiologyGastroenterologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis is a prevalent condition that is associated with an unacceptably high mortality rate. Early endoscopic intervention, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy within 24 to 72 h of hospital admission, can be used to remove stones in the common bile duct (CBD) and establish biliary drainage. Anecdotal evidence of its effectiveness led to formal testing in randomized clinical trials. Although the design and results of the four published studies have varied, the overall conclusion is that early endoscopic therapy reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis. Benefits are especially apparent in patients who satisfy generally accepted criteria for severe pancreatitis. The author's practice is to undertake endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with severe or worsening pancreatitis, or in patients with jaundice, cholangitis or dilation of the CBD. Endoscopic sphincterotomy is performed in patients with CBD stones or in patients with biliary pancreatitis and cholelithiasis who are not candidates for cholecystectomy. The roles of newer diagnostic modalities, including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasonography, are not yet clear.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersFrench-language works237,207