MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146319837 · doi:10.4314/eamj.v78i7.9007

Acute appendicitis in a Kenya rural hospital

2001· article· en· W2146319837 on OpenAlexaff
W S Willmore, Andrew Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueEast African Medical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAppendicitisAppendixAbscessAcute appendicitisKenyaRetrospective cohort studyGeneral surgeryRural areaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The literature on appendicitis in Africa is almost all derived from urban teaching hospitals. As most of Africa's people are from rural areas, we sought to review our experience from a rural hospital in Kenya. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: A rural Kenyan church hospital. SUBJECTS: One hundred and twelve cases of acute appendicitis presenting at Kijabe Hospital over a five year period were reviewed. INTERVENTION: Appendicectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sex, age, pre-hospital delay, operative findings, wound infection, post-operative length of stay. RESULTS: The male to female ratio was 1.8:1. The median age was 29 (4-71 years). Median prehospital delays were one day (normal appendix), one and a half days (simple appendicitis), three days (perforated appendix) and six and a half days (appendical abscess). Operative findings were 14% normal appendix, 42% simple appendicitis, 22% perforated, 21% abscess. Overall wound infection rate was 22%; ranging from 11% for simple appendicitis to 46% for an appendiceal abscess. The mean post-operative length of stay was nine and a half days. CONCLUSIONS: Acute appendicitis in rural Kenya is similar to patterns reported in urban African centres. The main difference from western data is the high complicated appendicitis rate which is most likely related to prolonged pre-hospital delay.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEast African Medical JournalSame topicAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207