MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103688445 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v6n7p130

Survey of Foreign Body Aspiration in Airways and Lungs

2014· article· en· W2103688445 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign body aspirationMedicineForeign bodyAspiration pneumoniaRight Main BronchusBronchoscopyPneumoniaBronchusSurgeryLungRespiratory diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Foreign body aspiration is a very serious problem and the diversity of clinical protests in each geographic region has its own characteristics and common problems of childhood that is an important cause of mortality and morbidity. No area is separate from this problem and conducting this research is due to achieve basic information regarding foreign body aspiration. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was performed as descriptive - cross sectional study on 200 cases that has been hospitalized in Imam Khomeini Hospital, Urmia due to foreign body aspiration problem from 2009 to 2011. And all cases of foreign body aspiration records extracted and analyzed using SPSS 16 software. RESULTS: Foreign body aspiration under 4 years was 57% and was more common in males than females; approximately 74% of patients were hospitalized in the first 10 days and 13% of patients did not remember the initial incident that led to the aspiration. Cough and shortness of breath and reduced lung sounds and wheezing were common symptoms. Chest radiographic findings are not specific and can be normal of a high percentage. The most common aspirated foreign body was food especially sunflower seeds. Right bronchus with 55% of cases was more common than the left bronchus and all patients were treated with rigid bronchoscopy, 24% of patients had complications, 15% had hospitalized with pneumonia. Totally, 75% of patients were urban residents. DISCUSSION: We need to understand all the aspects related to foreign body aspiration and education to the community, to recognize symptoms and type of foreign body in terms of geographical area and to create a strong clinical suspicion in physicians and awareness of its prevalence that by reducing the incidence and early detecting and treatment can reduce the mortality and morbidity and prevent additional expenses.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.318 · 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