International consensus on the use of intestinal ultrasound in inflammatory bowel disease trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is increasingly used to monitor treatment efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) trials. However, standardized definitions for response, remission, and optimal assessment timing remain undefined. An international expert consensus meeting was held to establish IUS endpoints for clinical trials. METHODS: A panel of 35 international gastroenterologists and radiologists participated in a modified Delphi process, reviewing the literature and developing consensus statements. Agreement was defined as at least 75% consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 150 statements across four domains: general IBD (30 statements), luminal Crohn's disease (CD) (43), perianal CD (51), and ulcerative colitis (UC) (26). For luminal CD and UC, ultrasound response was defined by: (1) a ≥25% reduction in bowel wall thickness (BWT) from baseline, or (2) multifactorial improvement, combining BWT reduction with ≥1 grade decrease in color Doppler signal (CDS) or another IUS parameter. Assessments were set at weeks 4-8 for the colon and week 12 for the terminal ileum. Ultrasound remission in luminal CD was defined as: (1) BWT normalization (≤3 mm) or (2) normalization of multiple parameters, including BWT, CDS, and all other IUS parameters. Similar remission criteria were proposed for UC, but the sigmoid BWT normal range (3-4 mm) remained uncertain. The bowel ultrasound score (BUSS) for CD and the Milan ultrasound criteria (MUC) for UC were supported as standardized scoring systems for trials. CONCLUSION: This consensus provides standardized IUS definitions to enhance consistency in IBD trials, supporting the integration of IUS in future research.
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 | 0.398 | 0.374 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.021 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
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".