MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979797953 · doi:10.1177/8756479311413816

Neuroendocrine Tumor (Carcinoid) of the Appendix With Mucocele

2011· article· en· W1979797953 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Al Imari, Rajkumar Vajpeyi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of diagnostic medical sonography · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraperitoneal and Appendiceal Malignancies
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppendixMedicineMucoceleAppendicitisRadiologyAbdominal painBowel obstructionGeneral surgerySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute right lower quadrant pain is a common emergency department presentation. Medical imaging has a main role to rule out appendicitis. Distinguishing between appendicitis and the other two major appendix pathologies, mucocele and carcinoid tumors, is not easy, but it is important for medical and surgical management planning. Appendix mobility is not usually assessed during sonography, but is it helpful? When comparing sonography and computerized tomography with histopathology findings to distinguish appendiceal pathologies, appendix mobility was found to be a key component. Appendix diameter, wall thickness, hyperemia, and surrounding echogenic fat are signs of an inflammatory process that will fix the appendix. Appendiceal carcinoids and mucoceles, on the other hand, will not initially have an inflammatory component for years, and thus patients present with only mild recurrent vague abdominal pain, normal blood work, and mild or borderline imaging findings. Sonography should be the first-choice medical imaging modality to rule out appendiceal pathologies because appendix mobility should be assessed and reported.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of diagnostic medical sonographySame topicIntraperitoneal and Appendiceal MalignanciesFrench-language works237,207