Typhlitis in Children With Malignancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a case-control study, medical records of all children (below 18 y of age) who were diagnosed with any malignancy between January 1988 and December 2008 were reviewed. Children who developed typhlitis during the course of their malignancy were identified. Age and sex-matched controls who were diagnosed with malignancy during the same time period but did not develop typhlitis were identified (1:4 ratio). The variables that were examined included underlying malignancy, chemotherapy, and final outcome. A total of 410 children (226 males, mean age of 87.29 ± 56.8 mo) with malignancy were recruited. Nine children (0.22%) (4 boys, mean age of 87.56 ± 60.48 mo) developed typhlitis during the course of their disease. In the control group, 36 age and sex-matched children were included (mean age of 87.67 ± 57.91 mo). Children who had Clostridium difficile infection within 8 weeks before developing typhlitis were more likely to develop typhlitis compared with controls (odds ratio 7.99, 95% confidence interval 1.46-43.7, P=0.01). One patient died from typhlitis. Clostridium difficile infection is a risk factor for developing typhlitis in children with cancer. Larger multicenter trials are needed to confirm our conclusions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".