An Unusual Case of Gout in a Young Woman with Gitelman Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: While gout is a very common and well-described disorder, it is rarely diagnosed in a young, premenopausal woman1. Overall, men are more than twice as likely to develop this condition over their lifetime as women. This sex difference is at its greatest in the 20- to 49-year age group, where incidence is 1.3% for men versus 0.4% for women2,3. The lower prevalence and incidence of gout in women has been attributed to the protective effects of estrogen and menstruation, which is consistent with the observation that it commonly manifests in women 10 to 15 years after menopause. When gout occurs in men under 30 years or in young women, investigation for a secondary cause is recommended4. This investigation should include checking for acquired risk factors and genetic disorders that exacerbate hyperuricemia (Table 1). View this table: Table 1. Secondary causes of hyperuricemia that should be considered in individuals with low risk for gout. A 27-year-old woman was referred by a nephrologist for chronic and intermittent right first toe pain, redness, and swelling for the past year. It was exacerbated by tight shoes, and relieved with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID). She also reported several episodes of pain, swelling, and redness in both ankles over the past year. She was constitutionally well and denied fevers, weight loss, or night sweats. Further history revealed psoriasis (PsO) treated with ultraviolet light therapy. She reported heavy alcohol use over the past 3 to 4 years, with binge drinking, and was previously hospitalized for acute pancreatitis. More recently she was diagnosed with Gitelman syndrome upon … Address correspondence to Dr. L. Rubin, Division of Rheumatology, St. Michael’s Hospital, Bond Wing 3-061, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1W8, Canada. E-mail: rubin{at}smh.ca
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".