A75 PEDIATRIC ABDOMINAL PAIN PRESENTING TO A HOSPITAL-BASED GI CLINIC: EVOLUTION AND DISPOSITION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Abdominal pain accounts for 50% of pediatric gastroenterology consultations. While data exists on the possible etiologies of abdominal pain, there is a paucity of data on the natural evolution of abdominal pain while under the care of a Pediatric Gastroenterologist. Given limited access to Pediatric Gastroenterologists and long waiting times for initial consultation for abdominal pain, understanding what interventions ameliorate pain may help Gastroenterologists advise referring physicians while the patient awaits a consultation. Aims Primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients who reported at least a 75% subjective improvement of pain over baseline consultation. Methods A retrospective chart review between April 2014 and Dec 31, 2022 was taken in a hospital based GI clinic. Subjects referred for assessment of abdominal pain were identified, along with subjects referred for reflux and dysphagia as a comparator group. Subsequent visits were abstracted to identify diagnosis disposition and assess which interventions were tried and to what extent they succeeded. Patient loss to follow up were also measured. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics, and regression modeling will be attempted to identify predictors of response. Results 393 subjects were referred for abdominal pain and 286 for GERD and dysphagia. 439 (64.7%) reported at least 75% improvement in symptoms. 242 (35.6%) underwent endoscopy, 263 (38.7%) used Proton Pump Inhibitors, and 38 (8.54%) used Polyethylene Glycol-3350. Carbohydrate eliminations of various types were used in 13.5 - 27% of subjects with pain. 193 subjects (28.5%) were ultimately lost to follow up though some did report improvement in symptoms. Only 45 (6.6%) remained in active care by the end of the study while only 13 (1.93%) were transitioned to an Adult Gastroenterologist at 18 years old. Conclusions Pediatric Abdominal Pain is primarily a transitory population in the Pediatric GI clinic, with a large number responding to successive interventions. There is also a sizable minority who are lost to follow up. Future studies should attempt to identify the reasons for loss to follow up and ultimate disposition. Funding Agencies William Osler Health System Summer Student Research Program
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".