MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004796839 · doi:10.1155/2020/3245634

Magnetic Apposition across the Epiglottis: Radiographic and Operative Correlation of a Rare Hypopharyngeal Foreign Body

2020· article· en· W3004796839 on OpenAlexaff
Yeli Pi, Shilpa Radhakrishnan, Yaser Alrajhi, Ravi Bhargava

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Radiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpiglottisMedicineRadiographyForeign bodyPresentation (obstetrics)Foreign BodiesRadiologySurgeryAnatomyLarynx

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aim . Rare-earth magnet ingestions are a subset of foreign body ingestions and can result in significant morbidity secondary to pressure necrosis. These magnets are best visualized radiographically, typically located in the gastrointestinal tract. However, unusual locations of magnetic adherence may include the hypopharynx along the epiglottis, where only 2 previous cases have been reported. Clinicians should be aware of the potential dangers of rare-earth magnet ingestion and consider atypical locations of attachment in the appropriate clinical setting. Case Presentation . We present an interesting case of a fourteen-year-old female patient who presents with witnessed ingestion of multiple rare-earth magnets. Soft-tissue neck radiographs demonstrate two adjacent rounded radiopaque densities in the hypopharynx. Intraoperative images confirmed the radiographic findings and identified two magnetic balls stuck along the dorsal and ventral aspect of the epiglottis without evidence of pressure necrosis. Conclusion . This is the first published case of magnetic foreign body adherence to the epiglottis in the Radiology literature. Awareness and recognition of the unique radiographic findings of this rare entity can help clinicians streamline timely management.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in RadiologySame topicForeign Body Medical CasesFrench-language works237,207