Bilateral Acromial Dimples: A Case Report and Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bilateral acromial dimples are uncommon in pediatric dermatology. They are usually found as a sporadic finding with limited clinical symptoms but may cause concern for parents. They can occur spontaneously or be inherited. Bilateral acromial dimples may occasionally be present as part of more complex syndromes. This article reports an 18-month-old girl with congenital bilateral acromial dimples and presents a classification of this unusual entity. A literature review of English and non-English publications was performed. We report the second case of bilateral acromial dimples seen in the context of maternal cocaine use during pregnancy. Our case is probably sporadic and nonsyndromal. We suggest that bilateral acromial dimples be classified as syndromal or nonsyndromal and that nonsyndromal cases be subdivided into inherited and sporadic. Although bilateral acromial dimples can be seen in 18q deletion syndrome, Apert syndrome, Say syndrome, and a recently described syndrome in Brazil, our review of the literature does not support the association with trisomy 9 syndrome. Dermatologists need to be aware of this unusual cutaneous finding and potential syndromal associations. The significance of the association with fetal exposure to cocaine during pregnancy has yet to be determined. The biological mother was not available for assessment for bilateral acromial dimples.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".