MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mongolian spots with involvement of the temporal area

2001· article· en· W1983120896 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander K. C. Leung, C. Pion Kao, Thomas K. M. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Dermatology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and Effects
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical examinationGestationSpotsBirth weightRespiratory distressPregnancyPediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Chinese baby girl was born after an uncomplicated pregnancy and a normal spontaneous vaginal delivery to a gravida 2, para 1, 32-year-old mother at 37 weeks' gestation. Neither parent had a history of alcohol or drug ingestion. There was no history of consanguinity. The Apgar scores were 7 at 1 min and 9 at 5 min. Her birth weight was 5 lb 14 oz and her length was 46 cm. At birth, she was noted to have grayish areas on the face and lower back. The infant was seen at 3 months of age because of persistent regurgitations. On average, she regurgitated 7-8 times a day. Physical examination showed that the infant was not in distress. Her weight was 6 lb 4 oz and length 47 cm. She had a Mongolian spot measuring 0.8 x 1.2 cm in the left temporal area (Fig. 1) and another Mongolian spot measuring 4 cm in diameter in the lumbar area. The Mongolian spots were grayish in color and the pigmentation was uniform in intensity. The rest of the examination was essentially normal. The infant was diagnosed to have Mongolian spots and gastroesophageal reflux. The latter was treated with postural therapy, thickened feedings, and metoclopramide 0.35 mg q.i.d. The infant was seen again at 4 months of age for a reassessment. There was no noticeable change in shape, size, or color of the Mongolian spots.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of DermatologySame topicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and EffectsFrench-language works237,207