MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1749336376 · doi:10.4081/or.2015.5889

Misdiagnosing absent pedicle of cervical spine in the acute trauma setting

2015· article· en· W1749336376 on OpenAlexaff
Fahad H. Abduljabbar, Felipe Rossel, Anas Nooh, Peter Jarzem

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopedic Reviews · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical spineNeck painAbnormalitySurgeryRadiographyRadiologyComputed tomographyCervical collar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congenital absence of cervical spine pedicle can be easily misdiagnosed as facet dislocation on plain radiographs especially in the acute trauma setting. Additional imaging, including computed tomography (CT)-scan with careful interpretation is required in order to not misdiagnose cervical posterior arch malformation with subsequent inappropriate management. A 39-year-old patient presented to the emergency unit of our university hospital after being trampled by a cow over her back and head followed by loss of consciousness, retrograde amnesia and neck pain. Her initial cervical CT-scan showed possible C5-C6 dislocation, then, it became clear that her problem was a misdiagnosed congenital cervical abnormality. Patient was treated symptomatically without consequences. The congenital absence of a cervical pedicle is a very unusual condition that is easily misdiagnosed. Diagnosis can be accurately confirmed with a CT-scan of the cervical spine. Symptomatic conservative treatment will result in resolution of the 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 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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopedic ReviewsSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207