MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059932778 · doi:10.4021//jmc.v4i5.1138

A Curious Case of Pericardiohydroptysis

2013· article· en· W2059932778 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khalid Mohammad, Yousef Shweihat, Gareth Tobler, Thaddeus Bartter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPericarditis and Cardiac Tamponade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePericardiumPericardial effusionChest painRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingLungPericarditisSurgeryPleural effusionPericardial fluidInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rupture of the heart or pericardium is a rare clinical finding almost always associated with trauma to the chest. Non-traumatic pericardial rupture into the lung parenchyma and pleural space has not been reported in literature. Hence the progression or natural course is not known and the optimal management not defined. We report a case of a 65-year-old male patient with past medical history of hypertension and alcohol abuse who presented with complaints of fever, and sharp retrosternal chest pain and was found to have rupture of the pericardium into the right pleural space and lung parench yma. The diagnosis was established with a computed tomography scan of the chest and a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Routine investigation and a surgical biopsy of the pericardium could not establish a cause for the pericardial rupture. He was treated as idiopathic pericarditis with improvement over time, and a repeat echocardiogram showed resolution of the pericardial effusion. More than a year after the initial presentation, the patient is stable with no complications. From the sequence of events, we presume that the productive cough which immediately preceded this diagnosis represented the coughing up of pericardial fluid (pericardiohydroptysis). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/jmc1138w

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicPericarditis and Cardiac TamponadeFrench-language works237,207