The Safety of the Re-Opening of an Academic Medical Center Outpatient Endoscopy Unit During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally leading to over 3,700,000 deaths. As COVID-19 cases stabilized, the re-opening of endoscopy centers potentially exposed patients and healthcare workers to viral infection. This study aims to determine risk of COVID-19 exposure among patients undergoing outpatient endoscopies in a tertiary care setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Patients undergoing outpatient endoscopy were contacted post-procedure for any new COVID-19 symptoms or COVID-19 test results. Patient experiences and perception of personal safety were also determined. Results: Of the 1,584 patients who completed elective endoscopy, 996 (62.9%) completed the survey. Two patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 within 14 days of procedure. The majority (99.7%) felt safe during their procedure and apprehension regarding endoscopy decreased over time. Conclusion: Thus, the risk of COVID-19 transmission during outpatient endoscopy is extremely low when following recommended society guidelines. Patients felt safe during the procedure and experienced less fear of exposure over time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".