MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1003641668 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.3.149a

Case 2: A 10-year-old boy with leg pain and swelling

2015· article· en· W1003641668 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Doherty, Laura Wheaton, Christina Vadeboncoeur

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePalpationErythemaPhysical examinationThighTendernessKnee painMorningSurgeryPast medical historyAnesthesiaPhysical therapyOsteoarthritisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A previously healthy 10-year-old boy presented to the emergency department with a history of right leg pain following a fall on the soccer field. He described a two-month history of intermittent mild right leg pain, rated 3/10 to 4/10, which worsened after activity. Pain had awakened him at night over the past three weeks. He was more fatigued, although he remained able to keep up with his peers on a competitive soccer team. His mother noticed that he appeared to have lost weight, and he denied any fevers. That morning, he fell on the grass during a soccer practice and experienced severe right thigh and knee pain, with significant erythema and swelling. The pain was unresponsive to appropriate doses of acetaminophen and ibuprofen, and he was unable to bear weight due to the pain. He described the pain as sharp and 9/10 in intensity. Medical and family histories were noncontributory. The physical examination showed a slight boy (weight 10th percentile for age), with swelling and erythema of the right thigh. Pain was elicited with movement of the limb, and there was tenderness to palpation of the distal thigh and knee. The remainder of the physical examination was unremarkable. Further investigations revealed the diagnosis.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicMuscle and Compartmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207