MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1938363037 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.2837

Le léiomyome vésical: À propos de 5 cas

2015· article· fr· W1938363037 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. Saadi, A. Bouzouita, M. Chérif, H. Ayed, A. Derouiche, Riadh Mohamed Ben Slama, Mohamed Chébil

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary and Genital Oncology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction : Les léiomyomes sont des tumeurs mésenchymateuses bénignes. La localisation vésicale de ces tumeurs est rare et représente moins de 0,5 % de toutes les tumeurs vésicales. Le léiomyome vésical est la plus fréquente de ces tumeurs mésenchymateuses et il représente le tiers des lésions bénignes de la vessie. Notre but était d’étudier les particularités épidémiologiques, cliniques, radiologiques, thérapeutiques et évolutives de ce type de tumeur.Matériel et méthodes : Nous rapportons une série de cinq cas de léiomyome vésical, colligés entre 2001 et 2014. Il s’agit de trois femmes et de deux hommes. La symptomatologie clinique est non spécifique et dominée par la cystite. Trois patients ont eu une énucléation et deux ont eu une résection endoscopique de la tumeur.Résultats : Le suivi moyen est de six ans. Un seul patient a présenté une récidive expliquée par la persistance d’un nodule vésical lors de la première intervention, avec une bonne évolution après la deuxième cure chirurgicale.Conclusion : Le léiomyome vésical est une tumeur bénigne et rare. Sa symptomatologie est peu spécifique. Son diagnostic est histologique. Son traitement est toujours chirurgical, offrant un excellent pronostic, sous réserve d’une exérèse complète pour éviter les récidives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicUrinary and Genital Oncology StudiesFrench-language works237,207