MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2007820022 · doi:10.4021/jmc.v4i8.1379

Gastrointestinal Tract Hemorrhage due to Angiodysplasia in Hutchinson Gilfort Progeria Syndrome

2013· article· en· W2007820022 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hanife Şerife Aktaş, Mevlüt Kıyak, Kâmil Özdil, Ibrahim Kurtca, Sevil Kibar, Süleyman Ahbab, Yusuf Karadeniz, Tayyibe Saler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAngiodysplasiaProgeriaStroke (engine)Gastrointestinal tractDiseaseGastrointestinal bleedingInternal medicineDermatologySurgeryGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hutchinson Gilfort Progeria Syndrome (HGPS) is an aging disease which encounters in childhood and includes a higher risk for atherosclerosis, cerebrovascular event, stroke and coronary artery disease. Angiodysplasia in the gastrointestinal (GIS) tract can be seen as a cause of hemorrhage, rarely. The case 15 years old female and admitted our center with a new onset nausea, vomit, and described the blackness in the stool. In the patient’s history, HGPS was diagnosed, according to medical file records. The patient was hospitalized with a risk of possible acute GIS tract hemorrhage. Medical treatment was administered and gastroscopy underwent in our clinic. Gastric angiodisplasy was identified.In the literature, there was not coincided HGPS case with hemorrhagic angiodisplasia, commonly. This case report was represented to emphasize HGPS associated angiodisplasia as a rare cause of anemia and GIS tract hemorrhage. J Med Cases. 2013;4(8):576-578 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/jmc1379w

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicPancreatic function and diabetes→French-language works237,207→