MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392790459 · doi:10.1055/a-2239-3468

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for diverticulum using combination of countertraction and circumferential-inversion method

2024· article· en· W4392790459 on OpenAlexaff
Hiroshi Takayama, Yoshinori Morita, Toshitatsu Takao, Douglas Motomura, Madoka Takao, Takashi Toyonaga, Yuzo Kodama

Bibliographic record

VenueEndoscopy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic submucosal dissectionPerforationDiverticulum (mollusc)ColonoscopyEndoscopyLesionSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicineColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been attempted in colorectal tumors involving diverticula, which lack a muscularis propria [1]. However, the R0 resection rate in tumors infiltrating the interior of the diverticulum remains low, and there is a risk of perforation [2] [3] [4]. We recently reported a novel traction method called the circumferential-inversion method, which inverts the lesion circumferentially [5]. Here, we describe the effectiveness of an innovative ESD approach combining countertraction and the circumferential-inversion method for a diverticulum-infiltrating tumor ([Video 1]).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndoscopySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207