Pneumopericardium associated with pulmonary-pericardial communication in a dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 6-year-old 18-kg (39-lb) spayed female Standard Poodle was referred for treatment of pneumopericardium. The dog did not have severe clinical signs relating to the pneumopericardium, and the diagnosis was made incidentally while investigating the cause of a cough. Computed tomography revealed an air-filled structure consistent with a bulla to the right of the heart base that appeared to communicate with the pericardial cavity Because spontaneous resolution of the pneumopericardium seemed unlikely and cardiac tamponade was a possibility, exploratory thoracotomy was performed. A lobulated bulla was found at the hilus of the right middle lung lobe adhered to the underlying pericardial sac, and a 4-cm-diameter communication from the pericardium to the pulmonary bulla was found. Right middle lung lobectomy was performed, and the pericardiotomy and pericardial opening were sutured. The dog recovered without complications. In previously reported cases of pneumopericardium involving a cat and a dog, the condition resolved spontaneously. In this dog, in contrast, surgical resection of the affected lung lobe with pericardial reconstruction was required for resolution of the pneumopericardium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".