Myocardial perforation by a stick foreign body in a dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: To report a case of myocardial perforation by a stick foreign body in a dog. Case Summary: A 3‐year‐old castrated male Labrador Retriever was examined because of a puncture wound seen after an unsupervised run in the woods. The wound was suspected to penetrate into the thoracic cavity on the basis of physical exam and radiographs. Uniform ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) and junctional beats were noted on electrocardiogram (ECG). Thoracotomy was performed and a 6‐cm wooden stick was seen protruding from the right ventricle through the pericardium toward the sternum. The stick was removed while purse string sutures were tied around the resultant myocardial defect. Follow‐up echocardiography revealed intact intracardiac structures. VPCs were treated with lidocaine and resolved completely within 24 hours of presentation. New or Unique Information Provided: Thoracic trauma can result in myocardial injury; penetration into the myocardium represents a life‐threatening situation for the emergency clinician. Cardiac injury should be included in the differential diagnoses of penetrating thoracic foreign bodies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".