MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567104763 · doi:10.1093/ajcp/138.suppl2.32

Synovial Fluid: Uric Acid and Calcium Pyrophosphate Crystal Morphology Revisited

2012· article· en· W2567104763 on OpenAlexaff
John Penman, Gordon Hoag

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric Acid
Canadian institutionsIsland Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcium pyrophosphatePyrophosphateUric acidSynovial fluidCalciumMorphology (biology)ChemistryMedicineInternal medicineBiochemistryPathologyBiologyOsteoarthritisEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard texts describe needle-shaped urate crystals and broader rhomboid-shaped pyrophosphate crystals and their respective negative and positive birefringence under polarized microscopy. This does not accurately reflect what we found in practice. This review attempts to illustrate the variety and complexity of urate and pyrophosphate crystals. During a 12-month period, we personally examined all synovial fluids and obtained representative photomicrographs to illustrate the range of appearances. Both crystal types are usually intracellular and multiple and can occur together in the same sample and even within the same cell. Even needle-shaped pyrophosphate crystals and rhomboidal urate crystals can also occur. Although classic shapes are usually present, rod-shaped, blunt-ended forms of both types are common and resemble each other closely. Both urate and pyrophosphate crystals can show variable birefringence strength. Pyrophosphate crystals may appear negatively birefringent if their axes are not to parallel or at right angles to the polarized light source. Only the type of birefringence (positive or negative) was able to differentiate urate from pyrophosphate crystals in some instances. Calcium appatite–like crystals are uncommon alone, but a few are often present with pyrophosphate crystals. Synovial fluid microscopy for crystals is best performed or reviewed by experienced staff. Less experienced staff may misinterpret crystals based on classic crystal shape or birefringence. Polarizing microscopes with rotating stages are preferable to combined polarizing/conventional microscopes. They enable pyrophosphate crystals to be better oriented to the polarized light source and avoid false birefringence. The incidence of both crystal types in the same sample is uncertain. Failure to closely examine intracellular rod forms and the false-negative birefringence of pyrophosphate may underreport or overreport the incidence, respectively. This may explain the wide range of reported incidence (2%-15%).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical PathologySame topicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric AcidFrench-language works237,207