Minimally invasive search for a missing vibrator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report a unique surgical procedure that was utilized to locate a missing vibrator in the pelvis of a patient. Emergency room admissions and surgery secondary to the malfunctioning of devices intended for sexual stimulation are extremely common. Emergency room staff of hospitals in the United States usually are skilled in the detection and removal of these devices. Occasionally, surgical intervention is warranted if the device enters a cavity that cannot safely be explored in the emergency room setting. We report a case of a vibrator that was lost during sexual activity. A flat plate X-ray showed it to be in the abdominal cavity. Careful questioning of the patient revealed that the device had an unusually small diameter. Surgical intervention showed that the device ultimately ended up in the bladder without causing traumatic injury. METHODS: We created a narrated video to demonstrate the surgical procedure (Canadian Task Force Classification III). RESULTS: Laparoscopy and cystoscopy were used to visualize and successfully remove the device. The patient recovered uneventfully. CONCLUSION: Following laparoscopic confirmation of the location of the device, it was removed via cystoscopy. This case demonstrates how background information, such as the size of the missing device in this case, can be critical to providing high quality patient care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".