MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220972441 · doi:10.53660/conj-696-a16

Síndrome da Cimitarra em paciente com Linfoma não-Hodgkin: relato de caso

2022· article· pt· W4220972441 on OpenAlexaff
Kalysta Borges, Ana Carolina Campana Nascimento, Aríssia Sousa, Carlos Eduardo Mesquita, Bianca de Almeida-Pititto, Giulia Almeida, Cairo Borges, Adriele Ribeiro, Poliana Pezente, Karla Penalber

Bibliographic record

VenueConjecturas · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O Linfoma não Hodgkin é uma neoplasia que se origina de mutações no tecido linfático nas células progenitoras B e T, cuja manifestação clínica se caracteriza pelo aumento de gânglios linfáticos e sintomas sistêmicos gerais. Doutro modo, a Síndrome da Cimitarra (SS) é uma variante rara de um grupo de desordens cardiovasculares congênitas, conhecido como retorno venoso pulmonar anômalo parcial, no qual o fluxo venoso pulmonar termina no átrio direito e não no átrio esquerdo. Esse relato descreve uma paciente de 60 anos, natural de Santarém-PA, que foi diagnosticada com Linfoma não Hodgkin difuso de grandes células com imunofenótipo B através de biópsia excisional e padrão imuno-histoquímico e Síndrome da Cimitarra associada, evidenciada na tomografia computadorizada de tórax. Após o diagnóstico do linfoma, conforme diretriz vigente, completou o esquema quimioterápico proposto com resposta completa e permanece em acompanhamento ambulatorial.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConjecturasSame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207