MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605138257 · doi:10.1093/pch/10.4.221a

Case 2: I don't like your tone

2005· article· en· W2605138257 on OpenAlexaff
Reshma Amin, Stacey Bernstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTone (literature)MedicineAudiologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A nine-day-old girl was transferred to a tertiary care hospital for investigation of hypotonia. Prenatally, decreased fetal movements and polyhydramnios were noted. There was no antenatal hemorrhage or infection. The family history was negative for consanguinity and neuromuscular diseases. A caesarian section was performed for breech presentation at a gestational age of 39 weeks. Hypotonia was noted at birth. On examination, dysmorphic features including microcephaly, bitemporal narrowing, a high arched palate and a thin upper lip with downturned edges were noted. There was no significant respiratory distress. Neurological examination revealed moderate, symmetric hypotonia. She had a weak suck and cry, and her spontaneous movements were decreased, but she was able to lift her limbs against gravity. Deep tendon reflexes were elicited. Clonus and fasciculations were not seen. Laboratory investigations revealed normal creatine kinase and thyroid stimulating hormone levels, and normal serum and urine metabolic screen. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, electromyogram and nerve conduction studies were normal. A muscle biopsy was going to be performed, but a diagnostic test revealed the etiology of the hypotonia.

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)0.005
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207