MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140118523 · doi:10.1155/2013/876503

Unusual Case of Inflammatory Myofibroblastic Tumor in Maxilla

2013· article· en· W2140118523 on OpenAlexaff
Jaana Rautava, Tero Soukka, Esko Peltonen, Petri K. Nurmenniemi, Markku Kallajoki, Stina Syrjänen

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Dentistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory Diseases
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMaxillaPathologyImmunohistochemistryVimentinAnaplastic lymphoma kinaseLungLesionHistopathological examinationAnatomyLung cancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) is a rare lesion found mostly in children and young adults and originates from the lung, abdominopelvic region, and retroperitoneum. Clinical manifestations of IMT or imaging are nonspecific and diagnosis is based on histopathological and immunohistochemical findings. Minority of all IMTs will metastasize. IMT in the oral cavity is an extreme rarity and this is a first case report of IMT in maxilla causing delayed tooth eruption and multiple cervical root resorption with an 11-year-old child. The IMT reported here was positive for smooth muscle actin, vimentin, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK1) with immunohistochemistry. Only three IMTs of the jaws have been reported so far and none of them had delayed root eruption and tooth resorption. This unusual case of IMT in a child was also ALK1- positive supporting neoplastic origin of her tumor. The case presented here underscores the importance of histopathological examination of the tissue found in any root resorption especially in the case of multiple resorptions.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in DentistrySame topicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory DiseasesFrench-language works237,207