MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537454456 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v11i2.141

Hyponatremia Due to an Interaction Between Hydromorphone and Desmopressin in a Patient with Central Diabetes Insipidus: A Case Report

2016· article· en· W2537454456 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gillian Mazzetti, Oren Steen, Ameen Patel, Natalia McInnes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectrolyte and hormonal disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHyponatremiaDiabetes insipidusHydromorphoneDesmopressinAntidiureticOpiateInternal medicineEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusHormoneOpioid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are case reports of opiate-induced hyponatremia thought to be mediated by increased secretion of antidiuretic hormone. We report a case of hyponatremia in a woman with central diabetes insipidus treated with desmopressin after receiving large doses of hydromorphone which suggests a different mechanism of opiate action. A 55-year-old woman with central diabetes insipidus presented to hospital with an asthma exacerbation, later complicated by intestinal perforation requiring surgery. She received hydromorphone for pain for 3 weeks before surgery, but her requirements increased after surgery. Her serum sodium subsequently decreased, reaching a nadir of 119 mmol/L. Hydromorphone and desmopressin were discontinued, and she was managed with fluid restriction, a 3% saline infusion and intravenous vasopressin. This suggests that hydromorphone may interact with desmopressin to potentiate its antidiuretic effect. Furthermore, hydromorphone may contribute to hyponatremia by another mechanism rather than by increasing production of antidiuretic hormone.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicElectrolyte and hormonal disordersFrench-language works237,207