MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144949773 · doi:10.4021/jmc1654e

A Very Rare Complication After Appendectomy in a Young Adult Patient: Abscess of the Greater Omentum

2014· article· en· W3144949773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shiryajev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOmental and Epiploic Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbscessSurgeryIliac fossaComplicationAppendicitisGreater omentum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An 18-year-old male patient was operated on for perforated appendicitis. An appendectomy combined with an omental resection was performed. On the 6th postoperative day, chickenpox was diagnosed, and the patient was transferred to an infectious diseases hospital. On the 16th postoperative day, the patient was readmitted with pain in the area of the postoperative scar, and body temperature of 38 °С. Substantial tenderness in the right iliac fossa without rigidity and peritoneal irritation was found on examination. By ultrasonography, a non-homogeneous hypoechoic mass measuring 40 × 37 mm without clear borders in the right iliac fossa was visualized, with a small amount of free fluid. The patient was reoperated on. An abscess of the greater omentum was found, and resection of an omental mass with the abscess cavity was performed. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on the 15th day. We discuss previously published data on postoperative omentitis and omental abscess. Our case is a very rare case of an omental abscess that developed after appendectomy in a young adult patient. J Med Cases. 2014;5(1):36-39 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/jmc1654e

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicOmental and Epiploic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207