MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605727906 · doi:10.23907/2011.028

Myocarditis at Post-Mortem Examination: A Forensic Perspective

2011· article· en· W2605727906 on OpenAlexaff
Allison Edgecombe, John P. Veinot

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Forensic Pathology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Immunology Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyocarditisForensic pathologyAutopsyMedicinePathognomonicPathologySudden deathCause of deathMalignancyMyocardial infarctionDiseaseCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myocarditis is an uncommon cause of death but its myriad clinical presentations, young target population, diverse etiologies and potential to cause sudden unexpected death warrant its review. Myocarditis has been defined as myocardial necrosis and/or degeneration in the presence of an inflammatory infiltrate adjacent to the damaged myocytes. The type of predominant inflammatory cell present may assist with elucidating its pathoetiology. Ancillary testing as an adjunct to routine histopathological examination, such as immunohistochemical or immunofluorescence staining or detection of viral nucleic acid are of debatable diagnostic use in either the biopsy or autopsy setting. Myocarditis may clinically and/or histologically mimic other disease entities such as acute or organizing myocardial infarction, or hematological malignancy. There are no macroscopic pathognomonic features suggestive of myocarditis, thus in cases of unexplained sudden death it is vital to sample the heart extensively to rule out myocarditis. It is important to recognize that myocarditis may be an incidental finding in an autopsy. To attribute the cause of death to myocarditis, all relevant case findings including scene investigation, autopsy and ancillary testing including toxicology should be assessed.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Forensic PathologySame topicViral Infections and Immunology ResearchFrench-language works237,207