MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800343861 · doi:10.1530/eje-18-0296

MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: Differential diagnosis, investigation and therapy of bilateral adrenal incidentalomas

2018· review· en· W2800343861 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Bourdeau, Nada El Ghorayeb, Nadia Gagnon, André Lacroix

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Endocrinology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal and Paraganglionic Tumors
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDifferential diagnosisEndocrine systemEtiologyCongenital adrenal hyperplasiaAdrenal insufficiencyHyperplasiaInternal medicineRadiologyHormonePathologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The investigation and management of unilateral adrenal incidentalomas have been extensively considered in the last decades. While bilateral adrenal incidentalomas represent about 15% of adrenal incidentalomas (AIs), they have been less frequently discussed. The differential diagnosis of bilateral incidentalomas includes metastasis, primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia and bilateral cortical adenomas. Less frequent etiologies are bilateral pheochromocytomas, congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), Cushing's disease or ectopic ACTH secretion with secondary bilateral adrenal hyperplasia, primary malignancies, myelolipomas, infections or hemorrhage. The investigation of bilateral incidentalomas includes the same hormonal evaluation to exclude excess hormone secretion as recommended in unilateral AI, but diagnosis of CAH and adrenal insufficiency should also be excluded. This review is focused on the differential diagnosis, investigation and treatment of bilateral AIs.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations96
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of EndocrinologySame topicAdrenal and Paraganglionic TumorsFrench-language works237,207