MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604903358 · doi:10.1093/pch/9.10.719a

Case 2: Why is he not ‘thriving’?

2004· article· en· W2604903358 on OpenAlexaff
Graham C. Thompson, Marina Salvadori

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Western OntarioAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypotoniaPhysical examinationPediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 15-month-old boy was being investigated for failure to thrive and hypotonia. He was born by cesarian section for placenta previa at 36 weeks gestation to a 38-year-old mother. Birth weight and height were below the third percentile, while the head circumference was at the 25th percentile. He required no resuscitation but hypotonia was noted at birth. Apart from an episode of pneumonia at nine months, he had been healthy. Weight gain had been poor, plateauing at 10 months, even with a high caloric intake of 195 cal/kg/day to 210 cal/kg/day. He still required assistance to stand and was unable to crawl or sit unsupported. Fine motor, verbal and social skills were intact. The family history was noncontributory. Complete blood count, electrolytes, renal and hepatic function, metabolic testing and thyroid-stimulating hormone level were normal. Imaging of the head and kidneys, nerve conductions and muscle biopsy were all normal. On examination, he presented as a bright boy. His height and weight were well below the third percentile, while his head circumference was at the 25th percentile. He had a triangular facies, small chin, blue sclerae, open fontanel and lacked any teeth. Scoliosis and bilateral clinodactyly were present. His limbs were symmetrical. Tone, reflexes, strength and muscle bulk were poor throughout. The rest of his examination was unremarkable. Cytogenetics, fasting blood glucose and a bone age survey were sent to confirm the clinically suspected diagnosis.

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)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207