MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124589470 · doi:10.12659/ajcr.894884

Spontaneous Pneumomediastinum in Non-Asthmatic Children with Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction

2015· article· en· W2124589470 on OpenAlexaff
Nattachai Anantasit, Wiparat Manuyakorn, Karen Choong, Aroonwan Preuthipan

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Case Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumothorax, Barotrauma, Emphysema
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPneumomediastinumMedicineSubcutaneous emphysemaBronchoconstrictionPneumothoraxAnesthesiaMediastinal EmphysemaChest painSurgeryComplicationAirway

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous emphysema can result from rupture of the respiratory or gastrointestinal systems, commonly occurring after trauma or surgery, as well as from rupture of alveoli as pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Spontaneous pneumomediastinum with subcutaneous emphysema is rare in children without chest or neck trauma. Here, we report 2 cases of spontaneous pneumomediastinum with exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. CASE REPORT: The first case is an 11-year-old boy who presented with neck pain after vigorous exercise. Radiography showed pneumomediastinum. The second case is a 15-year-old boy who presented with pleuritic chest pain and respiratory failure requiring intubation. We extensively investigated the possible causes of pneumomediastinum. Both patients had no history of trauma or asthma, and were diagnosed with exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. They were discharged after conservative treatment, without complication. CONCLUSIONS: Early recognition and investigation of serious conditions should be promptly done in spontaneous pneumomediastinum patients. Conservative treatment, extensive investigations of predisposing factors, and treatment are important.

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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Case ReportsSame topicPneumothorax, Barotrauma, EmphysemaFrench-language works237,207