MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769641391 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v8i12.2928

Not Just Another Aspiration Pneumonia: Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy

2017· article· en· W2769641391 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simant Singh Thapa, Abhijai Singh, Jeffrey Scott, Anthony Izzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOculopharyngeal muscular dystrophyMedicinePtosisDysphagiaAspiration pneumoniaFamily historyMuscular dystrophySurgeryInternal medicinePediatricsPneumonia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy (OPMD) is a rare genetic myopathy of adulthood onset which presents as late-onset ptosis, dysphagia and family history of ptosis and dysphagia. It occurs due to the poly(A) binding nuclear protein 1 (PABPN1) gene mutation. A 75-year-old male presented with complaints of fever, cough and worsening dysphagia. His father and paternal grandfather both had a history of ptosis and dysphagia. He was febrile, tachypneic and bilateral ptosis was noticed. The chest CT revealed consolidation. A modified barium swallow showed frank tracheal aspiration. An acetylcholine receptor antibody test was negative. An electromyogram and nerve conduction study revealed a generalized myopathic process with the absence of myotonia. With a history of adult-onset bilateral ptosis and progressive dysphagia along with the positive family history of ptosis and dysphagia, there was a strong suspicion for OPMD. Genetic testing was performed, which was positive as it detected GCG expansion in the PABPN1 gene, which is associated with OPMD and thus the diagnosis of OPMD was established. Malnutrition and recurrent aspiration are potential and harmful complications that reduce the life expectancy of these patients. J Med Cases. 2017;8(12):378-380 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc2928w

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207