MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136584569 · doi:10.1086/345956

Primary Cutaneous Cryptococcosis: A Distinct Clinical Entity

2003· article· en· W2136584569 on OpenAlexaff
Ségolène Neuville, Françoise Dromer, Odile Morin, B. Dupont, O. Ronin, Olivier Lortholary

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptococcus neoformansCryptococcosisMedicineMycosisEpidemiologyMeningitisDermatologyCryptococcusImmunologyPathologySurgeryMicrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cryptococcus neoformans is an encapsulated yeast responsible for disseminated meningitis in immunocompromised hosts. Controversies persist on the existence of primary cutaneous cryptococcosis (PCC) versus cutaneous cryptococcosis being only secondary to hematogenous dissemination. Thus, we reviewed cryptococcosis cases associated with skin lesions reported in the French National Registry. Patients with PCC (n=28) differed significantly from those with secondary cutaneous cryptococcosis (n=80) or other forms of the disease (n=1866) by living area (mostly rural), age (older), ratio of men to women (approximately 1:1), and the lack of underlying disease. Evidence of PCC included the absence of dissemination and, predominantly, a solitary skin lesion on unclothed areas presenting as a whitlow or phlegmon, a history of skin injury, participation in outdoor activities, or exposure to bird droppings, and isolation of C. neoformans serotype D. Therefore, PCC is a distinct epidemiological and clinical entity with a favorable prognosis even for immunocompromised hosts.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations241
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207