MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3164338179 · doi:10.7759/cureus.15257

Functional and Radiological Improvement in a COVID-19 Pneumonia Patient Treated With Steroids

2021· article· en· W3164338179 on OpenAlexaff
Rahul Singh, Dominic Gaziano

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsGeorgetown Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOutbreakPneumoniaCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CoronavirusRadiological weaponIntensive care medicinePopulationDiseaseAtypical pneumoniaSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PediatricsInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineSurgeryVirologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like its predecessors, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to long-term health-related consequences in a significant segment of the afflicted population. Although the medical community has developed multiple vaccines by now, COVID-19 has affected over 100 million individuals worldwide and will infect millions more before vaccines can be effectively distributed on a global scale. Additionally, it seems probable that another outbreak caused by a coronavirus may occur in the future, given that this is the third outbreak caused by a coronavirus in recent history. In light of this, the medical community must develop reliable methods of curtailing long-term sequelae of coronaviruses, and the use of corticosteroids in affected patients may be vital for this purpose. In this report, we present a case of progressive dyspnea caused by COVID-19 pneumonia; the patient was treated with a short course of oral corticosteroids, and subsequently showed marked improvement of the dyspnea with corresponding improvements on chest CT.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies→French-language works237,207→