MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026333081 · doi:10.1056/nejmcp0910041

Small Renal Mass

2010· review· en· W2026333081 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal hilumKidneyComputed tomographicNephrectomyRenal massCreatininePhysical examinationRenal arteryAbdominal massRadiologyAbdominal painUreterUrologySurgeryComputed tomographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 65-year-old man with a history of well-controlled hypertension presents for a follow-up visit after an incidental finding of a small mass in the right kidney on an abdominal computed tomographic scan (ordered to evaluate lower-quadrant pain, which has since resolved). The mass is 3.2 cm, anterior, heterogeneous, and solid, and is in the right renal hilum near the main renal artery, vein, and ureter; the left kidney appears normal. The patient feels well, his physical examination is unremarkable. His serum creatinine level is 1.2 mg per deciliter. How should this patient be further evaluated and treated?

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.240 · 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