MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200359797 · doi:10.52609/jmlph.v1i3.29

Lactation Ketoacidosis in a COVID- 19 patient: A Case Report

2021· article· en· W3200359797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Areej AlMweisheer, Aisha AlAtawi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Medicine Law & Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKetoacidosisMedicineBreastfeedingKetosisDiabetic ketoacidosisMetabolic acidosisLactationKetonuriaVomitingHypoglycemiaAcidosisPediatricsBreast feedingInternal medicineEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusPregnancyType 1 diabetesBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lactation ketoacidosis is an uncommon cause of high anion gap metabolic acidosis affecting breastfeeding women due to increased metabolic demands, reduction in carbohydrate intake, and acute illness. Meanwhile, recent literature showed that COVID-19 might cause ketosis, ketoacidosis, and diabetic ketoacidosis. We report a case of a 22-year-old lady, four weeks postpartum, with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. She presented with severe symptomatic ketoacidosis with a high anion gap, ketonuria and hypoglycemia that was due to lactation ketoacidosis. She was not tolerating orally for days because of abdominal pain, vomiting, and viral infection. After proper treatment in the ward for the presenting symptoms of lactation ketoacidosis and refeeding, she rapidly improved and discharged five days later. While ketoacidosis may be induced by starvation and/or lactation, it is our conclusion that the condition may be aggravated by COVID-19 infection. Emergency services should consider the risk of lactation ketoacidosis exacerbated by COVID- 19 in postpartum women.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Medicine Law & Public HealthSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207