MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135985273 · doi:10.12968/hmed.2009.70.3.40575

Subcutaneous endometrial deposit: an unusual cause of right iliac fossa pain

2009· article· en· W2135985273 on OpenAlexaff
Philip A. Hodnett, Sean E. McSweeney, Conor O. Bogue, Denis Kelly, H. P. Redmond, Michael M. Maher

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Hospital Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIliac fossaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 35-year-old woman presented to hospital with a 7-day history of worsening right iliac fossa pain. The patient reported a 7-month history of intermittent right iliac fossa pain, associated with a palpable nodule in the right iliac fossa. This nodule showed apparent increase in size and tenderness, on palpation, during her menses. Twelve months previously, the patient had undergone a caesarean section. Plain film of the abdomen was unremarkable. Ultrasound examination using a high frequency probe (7.5 MHz) showed a 2 cm nodule in the subcutaneous fat of the anterior abdominal wall superficial to the right rectus abdominus musculature which was hypoechoic relative to adjacent subcutaneous fat and of inhomogenous echotexture with low level internal hyperechoic echoes. Doppler interrogation showed a single vascular pedicle entering the mass at the periphery (Figure 1a). The margins were slightly irregular. There were no ultrasound features of incisional hernia. Computed tomography with intravenous and oral contrast revealed a 2 cm solid, slightly spiculated nodule, located in the subcutaneous fat without involvement of the anterior abdominal wall musculature and parallel to the Pfannensteil incision (Figure 1b). The nodule was hyperdense compared to rectus abdominus musculature following intravenous contrast enhancement, measuring approximately 80 Hounsfield units. There was minimal stranding of the surrounding subcutaneous fat. Differential diagnosis included haematoma, abscess, sebaceous cyst, enlarged lymph node, desmoid tumour, and malignant tumours such as malignant melanoma, or metastatic breast or renal cell carcinoma. Percutaneous biopsy using a 17 gauge coaxial needle system was performed under ultrasound guidance (Figure 2a). Histopathological examination confirmed endometrioma (Figure 2b).

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Hospital MedicineSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207