MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991152355 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz142

A congenital ulcerated nodule with spontaneous resolution

2019· article· en· W2991152355 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander K. C. Leung, Kin Fon Leong, Joseph M. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistiocytic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKuala lumpurLibrary scienceMedicineGeneral hospitalPediatricsFamily medicineHistoryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A female infant born by vaginal delivery at 38 weeks gestation had an ulcerated nodule on her left fifth finger that was noted at birth. Maternal health was unremarkable during the pregnancy and there was no maternal exposure to teratogenic agents. Parents were nonconsanguineous. There was no family history of similar lesions. Physical examination at 2 months of age was unremarkable except for a firm, ulcerated nodule with peripheral crusting on the ventral aspect of her left fifth finger (Figure 1). Laboratory investigations including complete blood cell count, C-reactive protein, serum electrolytes, serum creatinine, liver function tests, alkaline phosphatase, coagulation studies, urine specific gravity, radiography of the chest, skeletal radiograph survey, and abdominal ultrasound were normal. A biopsy of the nodule was also performed. The infant received follow up on a monthly basis with no intervention. At 4 months of age, the ulcerated nodule had resolved with scarring seen at the site of the previous lesion (Figure 2). On follow-up at 18 months of age, the child was completely well with no skin lesions.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicHistiocytic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207