MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084805072 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.10140

Recurrent nephrogenic adenoma in bladder diverticulum: case report and literature review

2012· article· en· W2084805072 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rafael Boscolo‐Berto, Claudio Lamon, Mario Gardi, Roberto Vezzaro, Marina Paola Gardiman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary and Genital Oncology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiverticulum (mollusc)CystoscopyAdenomaSurgeryRadiologyUrologyUrinary systemPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nephrogenic adenoma is an uncommon benign lesion of the urinary tract induced by chronic irritation of the vesical mucosa, due to infection, trauma, surgery, calculi, foreign bodies and chemical agents. A 68-year-old male was admitted to our linic for a periodical cystoscopic evaluation as part of a follow-up initiated due to a past transitional cell carcinoma. The scheduled cystoscopy revealed, within a bladder diverticulum, an unexpected and completely asymptomatic nephrogenic adenoma that we removed by transurethral resection. We followed up the patient at 24 months, then later we made the diagnosis of nephrogenic adenoma. During this time, the patient experienced three relapses within the same diverticulum, always involving a nephrogenic adenoma we persistently treated by transurethral resections. As the nephrogenic adenoma is considered a benign lesion without any direct evidence of a possible evolution to an overt cancer, we successful attempted a half-yearly cystoscopic follow-up to control the growth of a highly recurrent benign entity, interposing between controls a periodical imaging. This paper represents the second report of a nephrogenic adenoma within a bladder diverticulum, but the first case of a nephrogenic adenoma highly recurrent within the same diverticulum and managed conservatively by regular transurethral resection scheduled over the time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicUrinary and Genital Oncology StudiesFrench-language works237,207