Acute ‘Olympic’ Hepatitis: A Medical Experience from the Vancouver 2010 Games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A visitor from Asia, visiting for the Opening Ceremonies of the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games, who was in his mid 50s, was referred to the on-call Olympic Gastroenterology Specialist Group with acute hepatitis. The patient had no previous history of alcoholism or Hepatitis B or C infection. On presentation, he was found deeply jaundiced without any clinical encephalopathy and stigmata of chronic liver disease . Initial laboratory investigations revealed acute liver failure which was complicated by renal impairment. He was admitted to the Vancouver General Hospital. His immediate prognosis was considered significant enough to result in referral to the liver transplant services. With increasing global travel to Vancouver, it is apparent that acute HEV will need to be considered in the differential diagnosis of any patient with acute liver failure. Appropriate screening tests included Hepatitis A, B and C viral serology, metabolic and autoimmune markers, which were all negative. The initial history suggested hepatotoxicity from Traditional Chinese Medicines; however after a careful review via an interpreter, it was clear that the herbal medications were consumed after the patient became ill. A liver biopsy was performed which revealed features consistent with acute Hepatitis E (HEV). Subsequent positive viral serology for anti-HEV IgM then positive confirmed a diagnosis of acute HEV. After clinical review of the incubation time of acute HEV and the timeline of the patient’s visit to Vancouver, it was apparent that the infection was acquired in Asia. The patient’s liver function improved with conservative treatment and he was able to return home.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".