MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070505260 · doi:10.1136/jcp.2005.029017

Worrisome histologic alterations following fine-needle aspiration of the parathyroid

2006· article· en· W2070505260 on OpenAlexaff
Salah Al-Waheeb, Gloria Rambaldini, Scott Boerner, Claire Coire, J Fiser, L. Sylvia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHedgehog Signaling Pathway Studies
Canadian institutionsLakeridge HealthTrillium Health CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParathyroid glandThyroidFine-needle aspirationMalignancyParathyroidectomyPathologyNodule (geology)Thyroid nodulesThyroidectomyHypercalcaemiaParathyroid hormoneBiopsyInternal medicineCalciumBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is a procedure that is increasingly being performed. Artefacts occurring after FNA are reported to complicate the histological analysis of the tissue, mainly in the thyroid; WHAFFT (worrisome histologic alterations following FNA of thyroid) is well documented in the literature. The case of a male patient with hypercalcaemia who was subsequently found to have a nodule in the thyroid gland is reported here. He underwent FNA, followed by a total thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy. The abnormality in the parathyroid gland showed worrisome histological changes that were suspicious of a malignant lesion, resembling the changes seen in the thyroid gland after FNA. Parathyroid cells were identified by a review of the previous FNA. The concept of WHAFFT, which can mimic the features of malignancy in the parathyroid gland, is therefore introduced.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations65
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicHedgehog Signaling Pathway StudiesFrench-language works237,207