MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899297903 · doi:10.7759/cureus.3513

Sputum Smear and Culture-negative Tuberculosis with Associated Pleural Effusion: A Diagnostic Challenge

2018· article· en· W2899297903 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Asghar, S. Mehta, Hira A Cheema, Ravikaran Patti, William Pascal

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMarkham Stouffville Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisSputumPleural effusionMycobacterium tuberculosisSputum culturePneumoniaInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tuberculosis (TB) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Due to the unpredictable or nonspecific nature of its clinical presentations, TB can be a diagnostic challenge for physicians. In 2013, 23% of reported TB cases were culture-negative in the United States; in New York City, this was approximately 27%. The increasing number of sputum smear- and culture-negative TB patients is a serious concern because misdiagnosis and delayed treatment can lead to increased morbidity and mortality and increased infectious transmission. We report a case of a 26-year-old-female recent immigrant, who was initially managed for community-acquired pneumonia but was later found to have TB with complicated pleural effusion, despite having multiple smear- and culture-negative sputum specimens, Xpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)/resistance to rifampin (RIF) assay (real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)) and pleural fluid analysis. She improved clinically on anti-tuberculosis therapy and, later, the diagnosis was confirmed by pleural biopsy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207