MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124743952 · doi:10.1177/0145561320984581

Intraosseous Cavernous Hemangioma of the Middle Turbinate: A Case Report

2021· article· en· W3124743952 on OpenAlexaff
Yousef Bolous, Martin Bullock, David B. Clarke, Emad Massoud

Bibliographic record

VenueEar Nose & Throat Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations and Hemangiomas
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemangiomaMedicineDifferential diagnosisSkullMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyCribriform plateLesionAnatomySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We report a case of an intraosseous cavernous hemangioma originating from the middle turbinate that expanded into the anterior skull base, without traversing the cribriform plate. METHODS: The mass was found incidentally after a computed tomography head was ordered for unrelated reasons. On questioning, the patient denied any nasal symptoms. Magnetic resonance imaging showed an enhancing mass and the radiological imaging supported a broad differential. RESULTS: The lesion was removed by endoscopic image-guided surgery, and the pathology was that of a benign intraosseous cavernous hemangioma. There was no residual hemangioma on postoperative imaging and the nasal mucosa healed well. This is the first report of an intraosseous cavernous hemangioma of the middle turbinate showing superior expansion to the anterior skull base. CONCLUSION: This case demonstrates the extent to which cavernous hemangiomas may expand into surrounding tissues. While these lesions are uncommon, they can be considered as part of a broad differential diagnosis of sinonasal tumors.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.003
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEar Nose & Throat JournalSame topicVascular Malformations and HemangiomasFrench-language works237,207