Metallic hairpin inhalation: A healthcare problem facing young Muslim females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To perform an epidemiological assessment of metallic hairpin inhalation in young Muslim females and highlight the need for a health education program in this population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of females with a history of metallic hairpin inhalation presenting to the Otolaryngology and Cardiothoracic Surgery Departments at Mansoura University Hospitals from January 2000 to October 2006. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were identified with metallic hairpin inhalation, of which 2 were excluded as they were coughed and expelled by the patient. Ages ranged from 7 to 19 years. A history of inhaled foreign body (FB) was found in all cases but the majority of patients were asymptomatic, with only 6 patients (7%) presenting with cough. Chest x-rays confirmed the presence of metallic hairpin inhalation in all cases. The metallic hairpins were present in the trachea in 7 patients (9%), in the left bronchial tree in 43 patients (53%) and in the right bronchial tree in 31 patients (38%). Rigid bronchoscopy was performed in all patients with a retrieval rate of 80%. Repeat bronchoscopy was performed in 16 patients (20%), which was successful in 11 patients (14%). The remaining 5 patients required thoracotomy for removal of the metallic hairpin (6%). CONCLUSION: The significant number of inhaled metallic hairpins in young Muslim females highlights the need for a health education program in this population. Rigid bronchoscopy remains the primary tool for retrieval of these inhaled foreign bodies. However, when repeat broncoscopy is necessitated, a thoracotomy may be required.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".