MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184356930 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2020-239375

Hypocupraemia-induced anaemia, sensory ataxia and cognitive impairment secondary to zinc-containing dental adhesive

2021· article· en· W3184356930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rayyan Jamal, Omar Walid Dihmis, Liam Carroll, George Pengas

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtaxiaCopper deficiencyZinc deficiency (plant disorder)Neurological examinationAnemiaCeruloplasminZincGastroenterologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryPathologyPsychiatryCopper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 67-year-old man presented with 5 months of worsening memory impairment and sensory gait ataxia on the background of symptomatic anaemia. He experienced falls, agitation and became socially withdrawn over 3 weeks, resulting in hospital admission. On examination, he had sensory gait ataxia consistent with a dorsal column syndrome. He scored 13/30 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Serum analysis showed normocytic anaemia and leucopenia, severe hypocupraemia, reduced caeruloplasmin and normal zinc levels. Overuse of zinc-containing denture cream was the cause of excess zinc ingestion and resultant copper deficiency, leading to blood dyscrasia and myelopathy. The cream was withdrawn and intravenous and then oral copper supplementation was implemented. Direct questions with regard to excess zinc in the diet and serological testing of copper and zinc should be considered in any patient with a dorsal column syndrome, particularly with concurrent anaemia. Copper deficiency may also have a role in exacerbating pre-existing cognitive impairment.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207