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 OpenAlexaff
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

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.

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)0.218
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.246
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2180.246
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0150.009
Open science0.0090.013
Research integrity0.0350.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.011

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndoscopySame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207