A terapêutica endoscópica é segura e eficiente no tratamento de lesões localizadas no reto?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Colorectal cancer is among the most common malignant neoplasms worldwide and the pre-malignant lesions that lead to its appearance are polyps in their various types. As a minimally invasive method, endoscopic resection emerges as the preferred method for focused lesions. Objective: To carry out a review verifying whether endoscopic therapy is safe and efficient in the treatment of lesions located in the rectum. Method: Narrative review collecting information published on virtual platforms (SciELO, Google Scholar, Pubmed and Scopus). Initially, a search was carried out for descriptors related to the topic, which were identified through DeCS/MeSH, namely: “colorectal cancer, adenoma, mucosectomy, dysplasia, polyp” with AND or OR search, considering the title and/or abstract. Afterwards, only those that were most similar were chosen, and the works were read in full. Results: 41 articles were evaluated. Conclusion: With the evolution of concepts and technological improvements, there is an increasing possibility of diagnosing non-polypoid or superficial lesions (superficially elevated, flat or depressed) and laterally spreading or laterally growing lesions or tumors (LST). ) that, by definition, have a diameter greater than 10 mm. Mucosectomy may be indicated for minimally invasive treatment or prevention in cases that have not yet advanced and can be cured endoscopically.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it