MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768822617 · doi:10.1016/j.xocr.2017.11.005

An unusual presentation of a branchial cleft cyst in a 70-year-old

2017· article· en· W2768822617 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan G. Howlett, Peter Horwich, Martin Bullock, S. Mark Taylor, R. Hart, Jonathan Trites, Matthew H. Rigby

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngology Case Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Anomalies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdynophagiaMedicineParapharyngeal spacePresentation (obstetrics)DysphagiaBranchial CystAnatomyCystHead and neckDifferential diagnosisNeck massSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Branchial cleft cysts are common congenital head and neck masses predominantly presenting in a pediatric setting. Most branchial cleft cysts do not provide a diagnostic challenge as they have consistent physical locations and clinical presentation. This paper describes a rare case of branchial cleft cyst isolated in the parapharyngeal space. To our knowledge, this is the oldest presentation of a parapharyngeal space branchial cleft cyst in the literature. A 70-year-old non-smoking gentleman presented with a subacute presentation of dysphagia and odynophagia. Physical examination revealed a right posterior oropharyngeal swelling. On imaging he was found to have a 4.6cm cystic, right parapharyngeal mass abutting the prevertebral fascia. Fine needle aspirate suggested benign pathology. Surgical resection was pursued and final pathology was consistent with a branchial cleft cyst. Benign congenital branchial cleft cysts should be considered in the differential diagnosis for parapharyngeal masses, regardless of age.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtolaryngology Case ReportsSame topicHead and Neck AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207