MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903321850 · doi:10.1097/pec.0000000000001681

A Lodged Barramundi Fish-Bone Stabbing the Piriform Fossa in a Child

2018· article· en· W2903321850 on OpenAlexaff
Ran D. Goldman, Joshua Gurberg, John Moxham

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Emergency Care · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBarramundiFish boneFossaFish <Actinopterygii>SurgeryDentistryFisheryAquaculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unintentional ingestion of a fish bone is common in children, especially among families with high consumption of seafood. Complications in children are extremely rare. We describe a 3-year-old healthy boy who had a large bone of Barramundi fish lodged in his upper esophagus causing significant distress. Soft tissue neck radiograph revealed a mildly thickened epiglottis and bulbous and hypertrophied adenoid soft tissue. A 21-mm foreign body was noticed. A flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy revealed a large fish bone emerging from the left piriform fossa and arcing over the left arytenoid to hover over the posterior glottis. The bone was removed during anesthesia induction before a rigid esophagoscopy. The fish-bone entry point was seen stabbing through the edge of the piriform fossa and running down alongside the esophagus, without causing a through and through perforation. Fish bone ingestion can cause significant complications including perforation of the esophagus. Early suspicion of ingestion, radiological investigation, and swift management are important to ensure reduced complication rate in children.

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)0.003
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 score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Emergency CareSame topicForeign Body Medical CasesFrench-language works237,207