MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407285847 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae059.137

A137 A CANADIAN PILOT STUDY: UNSEDATED TRANS-NASAL ENDOSCOPY AND BIOPSIES IN ADOLESCENTS WITH EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS WITH VIRTUAL REALITY DISTRACTION

2025· article· en· W4407285847 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vishal Avinashi, Brian Greeley, E.M. Greaney, Jonathan W. Bush, Jake Jacob

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilic esophagitisDistractionMedicineEndoscopyDermatologyGastroenterologyInternal medicinePsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Esoinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic condition that requires endoscopy and biopsies for diagnosis and treatment evaluation. In pediatrics, anaesthesiology OR based sedation is standard practice, but it is resource intense, requires full fasting, and involves some risk. Trans-Nasal Endoscopy (TNE) with virtual reality (VR) distraction has successfully been used and evaluated at multiple Children’s Hospitals in the US. It uses thin endoscopes to obtain esophageal biopsies. This service is not available in Canada. Aims Demonstrate that unsedated TNE: - can be done safely in adolescents with EoE - can be done reasonably comfortably - tissue samples are adequate for histopathologic evaluation Methods A pilot was launched spring 2024 at BC Children’s Hospital offering TNE with VR for EoE patients. All TNE procedures were evaluated for any complications. Comfort / tolerability, was described using patient surveys including self-reported pain (Faces Pain Scale), worst pain during the procedure; anxiety (Visual Analogue Scale), VR and overall satisfaction from patients, caregivers, and staff. Heart rate was measured throughout. Biopsy samples were reviewed by a pathologist regarding size and quality. Results 7 teenage males have undergone and completed TNE, without complication. Mean procedure time was 9.6 minutes. TNE resulted in some pain, which returned to baseline levels (Table 1). Patients’ (range = 5-6), caregivers’ (range = 6-7), and staffs’ (range = 6-7) scores demonstrated satisfaction with the overall procedure. All involved were very likely to recommend VR for the same procedure (range 9-10). All patients reported that they would do TNE with VR again. Mean HR was elevated from baseline (68 BPM) compared to when the scope was inserted (78 BPM) and stayed elevated (74 BPM). Mean # of biopsies obtained was 5.7. Average biopsy size in TNE was 0.16 cm (range: 0.1-0.4) compared to the patients’ historical EoE procedures of 0.22 cm (range: 0.1-0.6). One pathologist noted that orientation in one TNE sample was poor, due to small size. Pathologists felt the need to ink the tissues to ensure embedding. No samples were lost. All pathologists found TNE samples were sufficient for evaluation with eosinophil counts reported. Conclusions Unsedated TNE with VR distraction at this early junction seems to be safe, reasonably well tolerated, and able to provide adequate specimens. Further research is needed to understand its feasibility in a more diverse sample. Funding Agencies Health Innovation Pathway Program: Minstry of Health BC; Equipment by Amacon(R)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207