MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2399616703

Etiology, presentation and management outcome of pneumothorax.

2005· article· en· W2399616703 on OpenAlexaff
Nisar Khan, Mohammad Salim Wazir, Mohammad Yasin, Jan Mohammad, Arshad Javed

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsAbbott (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePneumothoraxEtiologyBronchiectasisPulmonologyTuberculosisPresentation (obstetrics)COPDPediatricsPneumoniaPulmonary tuberculosisSurgeryLungInternal medicinePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study was carried to determine etiology, presentation, complications and management outcomes of pneumothorax in patients presenting at two hospitals in NWFP province of Pakistan.. METHODS: Pneumothorax patients reporting at the chest unit of Post Graduate Medical Institute, Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar, and Pulmonology unit of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad from 1999 to 2002 were included in the study. Patients of all ages were included. They were admitted and followed up to the full recovery/late complications. RESULTS: A total of 146 pneumothorax patients reported during this period. Majority of the patients were diagnosed to have pneumothorax due to pulmonary tuberculosis making about 36.30% of the total cases. Second most common cause was primary spontaneous pneumotihorax (19.86%). Bacterial infections were also sizeable at 16.43%. Other causes included COPD, Asthma, latrogenic, Interstitial lung disease, tuberous sclerosis and bronchiectasis. CONCLUSION: It was concluded from this study that pulmonary tuberculosis is the commonest cause of pneumothorax in our setup.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207