MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963419049 · doi:10.22374/jeleu.v2i3.47

Management Challenges of Ureteral Foreign Body-Clinical Vignette and Review of Literature

2019· article· en· W2963419049 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayun Cassell, Mohamed Jalloh, Mouhamadou M. Mbodji, Abdourahmane Diallo, Madina Ndoye, Yoro Diallo, Issa Labou, Lamine Niang, Sérigne Maguèye Gueye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endoluminal Endourology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForcepsMedicineForeign bodyUreterSurgeryVignetteUreteroscopyImpactionGeneral surgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foreign body in the ureter is not common. Most cases of eroded foreign body are preceded by an endoscopic or laparoscopic procedure. For most cases, ureteroscopy, holmium laser fragmentation of encrusted or calcified foreign body followed by extraction of foreign body using grasping forceps have provided optimal outcome. The literature review was conducted to assess the challenges in the management of ureteral foreign body in 13 case reports and compared the outcome using a clinical vignette of a 48-year-old female with metallic clip in the left proximal ureters following laparoscopic left hemicolectomy managed successfully with ureteroscopic holmium laser fragmentation and extraction with grasping forceps.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endoluminal EndourologySame topicForeign Body Medical CasesFrench-language works237,207