Extraintestinal Symptoms of Pain Are Common in Patients With Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aims: Extraintestinal symptoms are well-documented in systemic, inflammation-predominant conditions. Less is understood about extragastrointestinal symptoms among individuals with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs). We aimed to describe the differences in the frequency of patient-reported joint or leg pain and headache for EoE and non-EoE EGIDs individuals. Methods: Adult subjects and caregivers of children were recruited via the EGID Partners network and completed the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire and Migraine Disability Assessment Test. T-tests were used to evaluate differences in extraintestinal pain symptomology by EGID type. Results: = .01). Conclusion: Patients with EGIDs may experience extraintestinal symptoms of pain. These symptoms may be more prominent in patients with non-EoE only EGIDs. Understanding of the underlying factors contributing to these symptoms is needed to guide mitigating approaches for these symptoms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".