MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138425243 · doi:10.1186/1752-1947-5-591

Trivial trauma and delayed rupture of a normal spleen: a case report

2011· article· en· W2138425243 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Sowers, F Kris Aubrey-Bassler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Case Reports · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpleenDiseaseSurgeryPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Although a majority of splenic ruptures present acutely with a known mechanism of injury, a minority of patients present days to weeks following trauma with a delayed rupture. Also uncommon is the atraumatic rupture, the vast majority of which occur in patients with underlying splenic pathology. A handful of cases of apparently spontaneous rupture of a normal spleen are reported; however, there is debate about whether these actually represent delayed ruptures following a history of trauma that is not elicited. Although a few cases of delayed rupture of the spleen following trivial trauma have been reported, the majority of these present evidence of an underlying disease process. We found only two such cases that documented a normal spleen and three cases where underlying splenic pathology was not reported. We review the literature and discuss the phenomenon of delayed rupture of the normal spleen following trivial trauma. CASE PRESENTATION: A 27-year-old Caucasian man with no underlying splenic pathology presented with splenic rupture one week after playfully wrestling with his partner. The patient did not present at the time of the injury and only recalled it upon repeated questioning after computed tomography diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This case lends support to the theory that the normal spleen can rupture some time after trivial trauma, which seems like a more plausible explanation than rupture without cause. However, given the dearth of similar reports in the literature, the possibility remains that the association we have observed is not causational.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Case ReportsSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207