MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1728847507 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.1164

Giant renal leiomyoma: a case report and brief review of the literature

2013· article· en· W1728847507 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeiomyomaMedicineRadiologyGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on a very large renal leiomyoma in a man presenting with a 1-year history of lower back and flank pain and a rapidly growing abdominal mass. Since a cystic renal cell carcinoma could not be ruled out, a postembolization right radical nephrectomy was performed. Diagnosis was confirmed by pathologic and histologic analysis. Renal leiomyomas are very rare benign tumours that are nearly indistinguishable from leiomyosarcoma or renal cell carcinoma preoperatively. This case represents the second largest such entity reported and demonstrates the limited ability of accurate diagnostic determination preoperatively, with pathologic examination and immune-histochemical staining postnephrectomy representing the only definitive means of diagnosis. A brief review of the literature and an outline of typical clinical and pathologic features of renal leiomyomas are also presented.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.213 · 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