Retropharyngeal Abscess in Children: 10-Year Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Retrospective analysis of all patients treated for retropharyngeal infection in a tertiary care pediatric hospital. METHODS: Charts were reviewed for demographic data, duration of symptoms, radiologic workup, antibiotic choice, microbiologic findings, surgical approach, complications, and duration of medical therapy. Surgical findings were correlated with computed tomographic (CT) scans. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were included in the study. Empirical intravenous clindamycin was started for a trial of conservative medical therapy. Fifty-one patients (75%) responded to medical treatment, and only 17 patients (25%) required surgical intervention. The CT scan showed a sensitivity of 43% and a specificity of 63% in this series. None of the patients with retropharyngeal infection died, had a major complication, or had a recurrence. CONCLUSION: Based on the current study, we propose that all patients should be given a trial of medical treatment with intravenous clindamycin. Surgery should be reserved for those who do not respond. An extensive review of the literature is presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it