MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004611294 · doi:10.1186/1756-0500-5-701

Diabetic muscle infarction in a 57 year old male: a case report

2012· article· en· W2004611294 on OpenAlexaff
Ivan V. Litvinov, Arnold Radu, Natasha Garfield

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Research Notes · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineComplicationDiabetes mellitusInfarctionCellulitisDiseaseIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicinePhysical therapyMyocardial infarctionEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetic muscle infarction is a rare complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) and is often misdiagnosed as cellulitis. This complication is usually associated with poor disease prognosis and high mortality with previous studies reporting a risk of 50% recurrence or another macrovascular complication occurring within one year. Thus, there needs to be greater awareness of this complication of diabetes. CASE PRESENTATION: In the current work, we present a case report and literature review of DMI occurring in a calf of a 57 year old male. However, unlike the suspected trend, our patient has performed well after this incident and has not sustained another macrovascular event now > 15 month since his original diabetic muscle infarction. CONCLUSION: Even though diabetic muscle infarction is an uncommon condition, it is important to consider this diagnosis in a diabetic patient. We hope that our findings and literature review will aid clinicians to better diagnose and manage this condition.

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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Research NotesSame topicMuscle and Compartmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207