MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2975053899 · doi:10.14740/jmc3358

<i>Listeria monocytogenes</i> as a Cause of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis

2019· article· en· W2975053899 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elsa Araújo, Manuel Barbosa, João Costelha, Marta Pereira, Joana Serôdio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicListeria monocytogenes in Food Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpontaneous bacterial peritonitisAscitesPeritonitisAbdominal painListeria monocytogenesCirrhosisPeritoneal fluidCeftriaxoneAmpicillinSurgeryListeriaEmpiric therapyGastroenterologyInternal medicineAntibioticsPathologyMicrobiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is a common and often serious complication of long standing ascites in the presence of advanced liver disease. We report a case of a 74-year-old woman with alcoholic cirrhosis admitted to our emergency department with a 1-week history of diffuse abdominal pain and increased abdominal perimeter. On physical examination, she had a significant abdominal distention and a positive fluid wave consistent with ascites. A diagnosis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis was made and empiric therapy with ceftriaxone was started but the patient’s condition worsened. Four days later Listeria monocytogenes was detected in peritoneal fluid culture and ampicillin was initiated according to in vitro sensibility test. The patient completed 14 days of treatment with clinical and laboratory improvement. Listeria is an uncommon cause of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Clinicians should be aware of the uncommon agents of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, mainly when there is not a proper response to therapy. J Med Cases. 2019;10(9):257-259 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3358

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicListeria monocytogenes in Food Safety→French-language works237,207→