Accuracy and Usefulness of Radiographic Assessment of Cervical Neck Infections in Children
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy and usefulness of computed tomography (CT) in diagnosis and management of lateral and deep neck infections METHODS: An 11-year retrospective review of 110 children (age range 1 months to 17 years) was conducted at a tertiary care children's hospital. RESULTS: Fifteen patients treated medically (8 with cellulitis, 7 with early abscess) improved. Of the remaining 95 patients who had 107 cervical sites drained surgically, CT predicted accurately operative findings in 81 (76%) cases (72 with abscess, 9 with cellulitis). In the 26 (24%) cases with discrepancy between CT interpretation and operative findings, the most common problem was differentiating early abscess from cellulitis with 18 false positives (no abscess at surgery). In 8 cases, CT diagnosis other than abscess was made (4 cellulitis, 1 inflammatory mass, 1 hematoma, 1 lymphangioma, and 1 tumour); however, when the patients were operated on because of lack of improvement, an abscess was found. CONCLUSIONS: Although CT is helpful both in determining the presence and location of neck infections in children, the CT scan is less helpful in differentiating abscess from lymphadenitis, cellulitis, and some complex cervical masses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it