MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220706852 · doi:10.1016/j.ejvsvf.2022.03.001

Tibial Pseudoaneurysm Resulting from Repetitive Blunt Force Athletic Trauma in a Kickbox Athlete

2022· article· en· W4220706852 on OpenAlexaff
G. McClure, Vikram Iyer

Bibliographic record

VenueEJVES Vascular Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBluntPseudoaneurysmAthletesBlunt traumaMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationOrthodonticsPhysical therapySurgeryAneurysm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tibial Pseudoaneurysm Resulting from Repetitive Blunt Force Athletic Trauma in a Kickbox AthleteA 20 year old male kickboxer presented for assessment of exertional right leg pain, new after injury to his shin while blocking strikes.This pain affected the anterior shin with any activity.On physical examination, a pulsatile mass was palpable on the anterior shin.Computed tomography angiography demonstrated a 5 cm anterior tibial pseudoaneurysm (Fig. 1).The patient consented to open surgical repair.Intra-operatively, the lesion contained several septated compartments with multiple native vessel defects, unusual for a primary traumatic pseudoaneurysm.The decision was made to ligate, resect the pseudoaneurysm capsule to minimise mass effect symptoms, and close primarily.After two weeks he had no residual calf pain and had returned to gym training.He was cleared to return to kickboxing 10 weeks post-operatively.Although uncommon, tibial pseudoaneurysms have been reported previously, especially in athletes participating in martial arts and baseball.This report highlights the importance of considering vascular trauma when evaluating new onset pain from athletic injury.

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)0.006
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0120.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEJVES Vascular ForumSame topicVascular Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207