MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295185589 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2015-211752

Takayasu's arteritis and primary antiphospholipid syndrome presenting as hypertensive urgency

2016· article· en· W2295185589 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Yang, Mohammed Nayeemuddin, Bhanu Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsSaskTel (Canada)Regina Qu'Appelle Health RegionUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArteritisInternal medicineRheumatologyCardiologyTakayasu's arteritisTakayasu arteritisThrombusBlood pressureRenal artery stenosisErythrocyte sedimentation rateAntiphospholipid syndromeImmunosuppressionChest painRenal arteryThrombosisVasculitisKidneyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 33-year-old Caucasian man was admitted to the hospital with chest pain and hypertensive urgency. Physical examination revealed widespread arterial bruits and marked difference in blood pressure between the upper limbs. Vascular imaging showed widespread narrowing in multiple vascular territories. He met the established American College of Rheumatology criteria for Takayasu's arteritis. His resistant hypertension was considered to be a consequence of bilateral renal artery stenosis and he subsequently underwent sequential stenting of his renal arteries leading to improvement in blood pressure and reduction in the number of antihypertensive medications. Subsequent imaging revealed progression of aortic thrombus in the setting of an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and persistently elevated antiphospholipid antibodies fulfilling diagnostic criteria for primary antiphospholipid syndrome, requiring initiation of immunosuppression and anticoagulation.

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)0.003
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207