MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609136251 · doi:10.15273/dmj.vol43no1.6872

Clinical features and diagnosis of multiple myeloma

2016· article· en· W2609136251 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael Wong, Trudy Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie Medical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple myelomaMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

VignetteEM, an 85 year-old female, was admitted to the Medical Teaching Unit with a one-week history of confusion.In the Emergency Department, she was disoriented and later became somnolent.During the month prior to admission, she had experienced progressive mid-back pain, and had been diagnosed with a T8 compression fracture.Laboratory investigations showed a hemoglobin of 81 g/L with mean corpuscular volume of 101 fL.Rouleaux formations were seen on peripheral smear.EM had elevated creatinine (133 mmol/L), urea (11.2 mmol/L), and ionized calcium (1.97 mmol/L); however, parathyroid hormone levels were normal, as were iron studies, vitamin B12, folate, and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH).Urine culture revealed Escherichia coli bacteriuria, which was treated with ceftriaxone.Pamidronate was administered for hypercalcemia.Early into the admission, she became fluid overloaded and required diuresis, while simultaneously receiving intravenous fluids for her hypercalcemia.Multiple myeloma was considered as the cause of EM's constellation of symptoms, so a serum protein electrophoresis was performed, revealing an IgA monoclonal protein spike.Free light chain analysis showed an increase in free kappa light chains (7.69 mg/L) with a markedly elevated kappa/lambda ratio of 157.5.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDalhousie Medical JournalSame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207