Retroperitoneal fibrosis: a case report of spontaneous resolution
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this case report is to document an occurrence of spontaneous resolution of idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis and to review the investigation and management of this unusual condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A detailed case summary of a patient with retroperitoneal fibrosis is presented. Current citations in Index medicus from the English-speaking literature of relevance to the topic were reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient who refused open surgical intervention, bilateral stent placement allowed stabilization of renal function. CT-guided biopsy did not reveal malignancy. Serial CT imaging demonstrated gradual disappearance of the retroperitoneal mass. From the literature review, spontaneous resolution of this condition appears to be a rare phenomenon. Although often utilized, CT-guided biopsy may fail to exclude the presence of malignancy. Open surgical biopsy of the retroperitoneal mass and ureterolysis remain the standard of care for operative candidates. Establishing renal drainage and considering a trial of steroids or surveillance may be an option in carefully selected individuals.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it