MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986598014 · doi:10.1186/s12905-014-0141-6

Post-coital posterior fornix perforation with vaginal evisceration

2014· article· en· W1986598014 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Ernest, Mtui Emmanuel, Knapp Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Women s Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvisceration (ophthalmology)FornixPerforationMedicineVaginaSurgeryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cases of post-coital posterior fornix perforation with vaginal eviscerations are infrequently reported in literature and uncommon cause for laparotomy. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of 28 year old nulliparous woman presented to the hospital with per vaginal bleeding and evisceration following penile-vaginal sexual intercourse. CONCLUSION: High degree of suspicion in these cases is important especially in sexually active women as delay in management often results in life threatening blood loss, peritonitis and intestinal obstruction. Physicians should be aware that initial patient history may be inaccurate or misleading if taken in the presence of family or partner given the sensitive nature of the injury.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Women s HealthSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207