MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621041268 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v8i6.2762

Epidermoid Cyst Presenting in the Floor of the Mouth

2017· article· en· W2621041268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Hania, Christopher Mannion

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTeratomas and Epidermoid Cysts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFloor of mouthEpidermoid cystLesionDermoid cystPathologicalHead and neckCystMultidisciplinary teamDifferential diagnosisRadiologyPathologyAnatomySurgeryTongue

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dermoid cysts are developmental malformations due to a defect in the fusion of embryonic lateral mesenchymatic layers during the fifth week of embryological development. Thirty-four percent of dermoid cysts occur in the head and neck area, of which 6.5% are in the floor of mouth. We present a rare case of a 17-year-old female with epidermoid cyst presenting in the floor of the mouth. A working diagnosis of a “plunging ranula” was concluded following salivary gland multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting and the patient subsequently underwent an excision of lesion with right sublingual gland via an intraoral approach under GA. However, the pathology revealed the lesion consistent with an epidermoid cyst. We discuss the numerous pathological conditions that can affect the floor of the mouth, and differential diagnoses of lesions of a development, inflammatory, obstructive or neoplastic origin. Imaging aids such as ultrasound, MRI, and CT of head with contrast area are of valuable importance for estimating tumor margins and lesion composition, and assessing infiltration in surrounding tissues along with MDT which give platform with other departments to help form a working diagnosis and guide surgical approach. J Med Cases. 2017;8(6):171-173 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc2762w

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicTeratomas and Epidermoid CystsFrench-language works237,207