MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W170269390 · doi:10.1155/2012/326357

Disseminated Sarcoidosis Resulting in Portal Hypertension and Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Rare Presentation

2012· article· en· W170269390 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chinedu Ivonye, Balsam Elhammali, Marshaleen Henriques‐Forsythe, Raquel Bennett-Gittens, Adesoji Oderinde

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsSarcoidosisPresentation (obstetrics)Portal hypertensionMedicineGastrointestinal bleedingDermatologyInternal medicineRadiologyCirrhosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 41-year-old man was evaluated for an upper gastrointestinal bleed.He was stabilized and an upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed gastritis and esophageal varices.A computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen showed hepatosplenomegaly and moderate ascites.Analysis of the ascitic fluid was consistent with portal hypertension.A liver biopsy demonstrated noncaseating granuloma consistent with sarcoidosis, there was no evidence of liver cirrhosis on pathology.Portal hypertension associated with sarcoidosis is rare; after the first reported case in 1949, 35 other cases have been reported in the English literature, with only 16 patients presenting with portal hypertension without evidence of liver cirrhosis.Our patient is among the small group reported to have sarcoidosis-related portal hypertension without evidence of liver cirrhosis.The present case illustrates the importance of recognizing an uncommon manifestation of sarcoidosis

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207