MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2138555958 · doi:10.4021//jmc.v2i6.396

Hydrocele and Unexpected Diagnosis: Malignant Mesothelioma of Tunica Vaginalis Testis

2011· article· en· W2138555958 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samir Abdullazade, Ali̇ Ergen, Dilek Ertoy Baydar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTunica vaginalisMedicineHydroceleMesotheliomaMalignancyBiopsyDifferential diagnosisPathologyHistopathologyScrotumAsbestosRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Testicular mesothelioma originating from tunica vaginalis is a very rare disease. A 70-year-old man complained of left testicular swelling and was operated with the clinical diagnosis of hydrocele. Intra-operative examination revealed diffuse thickening of tunica vaginalis, which was thought to be inflammatory and benign by the urologist. Nevertheless an incisional biopsy was performed and atypical mesothelial proliferation was reported in histopathology. Morphologic findings were insufficient for definitive diagnosis of malignancy. Patient was followed-up for ten months. Due to the persistance of paratesticular thickening and additional appearance of nodularities, left inguinal orchiectomy was performed. Microscopy revealed classical malignant mesothelioma originating from tunica vaginalis. Two years after the diagnosis, patient had metastases to the paraaortic lymph nodes. Malignant mesothelioma of the testis may represent with diagnostic difficulties both clinically and pathologically. In all cases where paratesticular tissues may deviate from normal, mesothelioma must enter into the differential diagnosis. doi:10.4021/jmc396w

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicOccupational and environmental lung diseases→French-language works237,207→