MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328341798 · doi:10.14740/jcgo.v5i1.357

Transient Osteoporosis of the Knees, Ankles and Feet: Atypical Case in a Twin Pregnancy

2016· article· en· W2328341798 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tatiana Elizabeth Carranco-Medina, Ismael Calero‐Paniagua, Cristina Hidalgo, M. Sánchez-González, Carlos Montilla, Alba Quesada-Moreno, Ricardo Usategui‐Martín, Laura Pérez-Garrido, Susana Gómez‐Castro, Olga Martínez González, Javier del Pino‐Montes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Joint Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnklePregnancySelf limitingBisphosphonateOsteoporosisRadiological weaponLimitingFoot (prosody)SurgeryEmergency departmentHip painKnee painOsteoarthritisInternal medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transient osteoporosis (TO) is a rare entity with unknown origin which is, in most cases, self-limiting. The most common location is the hip, which can sometimes be bilateral, followed by the knee, ankle and foot. The multifocal, bilateral and simultaneous location of knees, ankles and feet during pregnancy is extremely rare. We present the case of a woman, 25 weeks pregnant with twins, who was admitted as an emergency with pain and functional disability of her lower limbs. She required hospitalization and was diagnosed with transient osteoporosis of pregnancy (TOP), with clinical and radiological resolution after 12 months and treatment with intravenous bisphosphonate. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2016;5(1):37-40 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jcgo357w

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)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicBone and Joint DiseasesFrench-language works237,207