MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126647447 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2020-239936

Spurious point-of-care lactate elevation in ethylene glycol intoxication: rediscovering a clinical pearl

2021· article· en· W3126647447 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Poirier-Blanchette, Camille Simard, Blair Carl Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPoisoning and overdose treatments
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthylene glycol poisoningLactic acidosisMedicineEthylene glycolAcidosisMetabolic acidosisLactic acidIntensive care medicineInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 76-year-old man was found unresponsive and brought to the emergency department. Initial workup showed profound lactic acidosis on a point-of-care arterial blood gas, without clinical signs of hypoperfusion. Investigations for types A and B lactic acidosis revealed no unifying diagnosis to explain both his altered mental status and profound lactic acidosis. A toxicology workup revealed an increased osmolar gap and an elevated ethylene glycol level. The lactic acidosis and his mental status completely normalised within 8 hours of renal replacement therapy initiation and fomepizole administration. Ethylene glycol metabolites have similar molecular structure with L-lactate. Some blood gas analysers are unable to differentiate them, resulting in an artefactual lactate elevation. Our case highlights the importance of recognising a falsely elevated lactate, which should raise clinical suspicion of ethylene glycol poisoning, as the treatment is time-sensitive to prevent complications and mortality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0080.006
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicPoisoning and overdose treatmentsFrench-language works237,207