MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760954175 · doi:10.1177/1753495x17724950

The use of PET/CT in pregnancy: A case report of malignant parathyroid carcinoma and a review of the literature

2017· review· en· W2760954175 on OpenAlex
Manpreet Gill, Winnie Sia, Michael Hoskinson, Erin Niven, Rshmi Khurana

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePositron emission tomographyRadiologyPregnancyTomographyMagnetic resonance imagingPositron emissionPositron Emission Tomography-Computed TomographyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Positron emission tomography scanning is not commonly performed in pregnancy but can be done if required. Fetal doses of radiation can be minimized, and our case exemplifies the safe application of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in pregnancy. A 38-year-old woman in her first ongoing pregnancy presented at 28 weeks' gestation with symptomatic hypercalcemia. Given a history of parathyroid carcinoma, recurrence was suspected. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging failed to locate the lesion. However, positron emission tomography/computed tomography identified a culprit supraclavicular lymph node. This was excised under local anesthesia resulting in normalization of parathyroid hormone and calcium levels. A term, healthy baby was delivered. The literature provides support that the use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography is acceptable when indicated, and there are modifications to protocols that can further limit risk.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.248 · 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