MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2081416980 · doi:10.4021//jmc.v3i3.560

Septic Thrombophlebitis Complicating a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter

2012· article· en· W2081416980 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Esmadi, Humera Ahsan, Dina Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombophlebitisCatheterJugular veinSurgeryCentral venous catheterComplicationInternal jugular veinSuperior vena cavaThrombosisSepsisVeinPeripherally inserted central catheterThrombusAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters are associated with several complications. Thrombosis, catheter-related infection and phlebitis are well-recognized complications. However, septic thrombophlebitis is very rare. We describe a 44-year-old patient with heart failure who developed extensive septic thrombophlebitis of the right internal jugular, brachicephalic, facial veins and superior vena cava as a complication of prolonged use of a peripherally inserted central venous catheter that was inserted for dobutamine infusion. The catheter was displaced into the internal jugular vein by manipulation of the patient who used it for injection of illegal drugs. Blood cul tures grew Citrobacter amalonaticus and Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus with the former growing more often making it the more likely causative agent. The patient was treated successfully with antibiotics and anticoagulation. To our knowledge Citrobacter amalonaticus has not been previously recognized to be associated with septic th rombophlebitis. doi:10.4021/jmc560w

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis→French-language works237,207→