MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895773461 · doi:10.14740/gr1056w

Isolated Superior Mesenteric Artery Dissection: A Case Report and Literature Review

2018· article· en· W2895773461 on OpenAlex
Hussein Daoud, Ashraf Abugroun, Ahmed Subahi, Habeeb Khalaf

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal vascular conditions and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSuperior mesenteric arteryAsymptomaticAbdominal painPresentation (obstetrics)SurgeryAcute abdomenRadiologyAbdomenMesenteric ischemiaBowel resectionDissection (medical)Inferior mesenteric arteryIschemiaCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (ISMAD) is an uncommon cause of abdominal pain. Clinical presentation ranges from an asymptomatic incidental finding to acute bowel ischemia or fatal aneurysmal super mesenteric artery (SMA) rupture. We report the case of a 58-year-old male presenting with abdominal pain. Imaging studies revealed an ISMAD without radiological evidence of bowel ischemia. The patient was successfully treated using a conservative approach including bowel rest and anticoagulation. ISMAD incidence is expected to increase with the utilization of advanced imaging modalities. Thus, an ISMAD should be suspected when other common causes of an acute abdomen have been excluded. Given the lack of evidence-based guidelines, management options include conservative treatment and anticoagulation, endovascular stenting, or open surgical repair.

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)0.000
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.342 · 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