MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774317845 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000008907

A case report of an emergency in the scrotum of a 4-month-old boy

2017· article· en· W2774317845 on OpenAlexaff
Cong Shang, Jin Zhang, Qian Wang, Li Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScrotumForeign bodyGroinSoft tissueSurgeryConnective tissueSpermatic cordPathologicalEmergency departmentPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Retained foreign body (FB) in soft tissues of children is commonly encountered in the emergency room. The FBs include different kinds of material and associate with some nonspecific symptoms. They usually penetrate the skin or other soft tissues and show some entry holes. PATIENT: A 4-month-old male infant was admitted to our department due to the edema on the right of scrotum, higher skin temperature, and a funicular lump with serious haphalgesia in the right groin and scrotum. DIAGNOSES: Imaging studies revealed a foreign body in right spermatic cord. A surgical exploration was performed, and a hair was dislodged. The pathological diagnosis was hyperplastic fibrous connective tissue and inflammatory reaction. INTERVENTIONS: A surgical exploration was performed to dislodge the foreign body. OUTCOMES: The boy had an uneventful course after the surgery and was discharged from the hospital one week later. The incision healed well when the boy came back for follow-up one week later. LESSONS: We still have no idea that how this FB got to the soft tissue. Few previous studies can be retrieved to help us. But we can learn that foreign body should be one of consideration for the origin of inflammation or infection of soft tissues even there is not any laceration and penetration injuries.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.364
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 teacher head, 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 venueMedicineSame topicForeign Body Medical CasesFrench-language works237,207