Un rein fracturé, séquelle inattendue d’un ancien traumatisme lombaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Un homme de 40 ans est évalué pour une hypertension artérielle présente depuis un an qui répond à une simple restriction sodée et à un traitement antihypertenseur léger. Un bilan à la recherche d’une forme secondaire d’hypertension est négatif. En raison d’une histoire passée de traumatisme au rein gauche, on décide de procéder à une artériographie qui révèle la présence d’un rein gauche fracturé. Cette image inhabituelle paraît résulter de deux facteurs : une circulation artérielle fournie par deux artères polaires et du tissu cicatriciel dans la portion moyenne du parenchyme rénal à la suite du traumatisme antérieur. A 40-year old man is evaluated for arterial hypertension of one's year duration, which responded well to salt restriction and mild antihypertensive medication. The standard investigation for possible secondary hypertension is negative. In view of a remote history of left renal trauma, it is decided to do an angiogram, which reveals the presence of a fractured left kidney. This unusual image is considered to be secondary to the combination of an arterial supply provided by two polar arteries and of scarring in the mid-portion of the renal parenchyma secondary to the remote trauma.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".