MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408664082 · doi:10.1055/a-2543-0400

Endoscopic Sustainability PrimAry Reporting Essentials (E-SPARE): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

2025· article· en· W4408664082 on OpenAlex
João A. Cunha Neves, Robin Baddeley, Enrique Rodríguez de Santiago, Mário Dinis‐Ribeiro, Heiko Pohl, Mathieu Pioche, Vicente Lorenzo‐Zúñiga, Eduardo Albéniz, Andrei Voiosu, Christoph Römmele, Leigh Donnelly, Luca Elli, Pedro López-Muñoz, Dorothea Henniger, Kareem Khalaf, Marco J. Bruno, Marianna Arvanitakis, Raf Bisschops, Cesare Hassan, Helmut Messmann, Ian M. Gralnek, Peter D. Siersema, Siwan Thomas‐Gibson, Bu Hayee

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEndoscopy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopyCLARITYTransparency (behavior)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing number of studies aim to evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy services from the perspective of their environmental impact. However, there are currently no guidelines or frameworks which provide specifically for the reporting of endoscopy sustainability studies, and a variety of metrics and assessment tools have been employed in the literature. To improve the clarity, transparency, and quality of reporting, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has developed a reporting framework for the community of researchers interested in conducting studies on sustainable GI endoscopy.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.304 · 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