MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000312032 · doi:10.1186/1752-1947-3-6656

Medullary sponge kidney presenting in a neonate with distal renal tubular acidosis and failure to thrive: a case report

2009· article· en· W2000312032 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed El-Sawi, Abdul-Rahman Shahein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Case Reports · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNephrocalcinosisMedullary cavityRenal tubular acidosisMetabolic acidosisHypercalciuriaKidneyDistal renal tubular acidosisFailure to thriveAcidosisNephronInternal medicineAzotemiaPathologyUrinary systemEndocrinologyUrologyRenal function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Medullary sponge kidney is a congenital anomaly characterized by diffuse ectasy of the collecting tubules of one or both kidneys. It is usually diagnosed in the second or third decade of life. CASE PRESENTATION: Distal renal tubular acidosis is commonly observed in patients with medullary sponge kidney. We describe here a 50-day-old Egyptian Caucasian girl with medullary sponge kidney who had features of distal renal tubular acidosis, (persistent alkaline urine, hypercalciuria, hypocitraturia) and failure to thrive. Renal ultrasound revealed left renal increased medullary echogenicity and bilateral nephrocalcinosis. CONCLUSION: Early gene(s) expression of medullary sponge kidney disease might be responsible for persistent metabolic acidosis during the neonatal period.

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)0.006
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.003
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Case ReportsSame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207