MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cecal Intussusception in an Adult with Cronkhite-Canada Syndrome Relieved by Colonoscopy

2010· article· en· W2080095698 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emi Ishikawa, Masatoshi Kudo, Yasunori Minami, Kazuomi Ueshima, Satoshi Kitai, Kazuki Ueda

Bibliographic record

VenueInternal Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopyIntussusception (medical disorder)Abdominal painAscending colonTransverse colonSurgeryLumen (anatomy)Internal medicineColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cronkhite-Canada syndrome (CCS) is a rare, noninherited gastrointestinal polyposis syndrome associated with characteristic ectodermal abnormalities. Here, we report a case of Cronkhite-Canada syndrome with cecal intussusception relieved by colonoscopy. A 52-year-old man who was diagnosed as CCS pathologically two years previously presented abdominal pain and sub fever-up. Physical examination revealed the palpable mass sized approximate 10 cm in diameter in the upper abdominal site, in addition to the symptoms of alopecia, absent fingernails and toenails. However, abdominal wall rigidity and rebound tenderness were never expressed. Abdominal plain CT showed concentric circles from the ascending to the middle of the transverse colon, and a tumor in the lumen at the middle of the transverse colon. Colonoscopic reduction was performed first because we diagnosed it as intussusception due to CCS polyps without peritoneal irritation, and his symptoms were improved dramatically after careful reduction. Therefore, he was able to undergo the laparoscopic ascending colectomy as scheduled.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternal MedicineSame topicGastrointestinal disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207