Co-occurrence of Eosinophilic/T-Cell Chorionic Vasculitis and Acute Chorionitis, Acute Chorionic Vasculitis, and Funisitis in a Term Placenta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T lymphocytes ... [that] occurs in the absence of any evidence of chorioamnionitis." No subsequent reports have directly addressed whether histologic evidence suggestive of amniotic fluid infection should preclude its diagnosis. The case reported here describes a term placenta with mild acute chorionitis, moderate acute subchorionitis, mild acute chorionic vasculitis, and funisitis associated with multifocal eosinophilic/T-cell chorionic vasculitis. It shows unequivocally, with immunohistochemical staining, that eosinophilic/T-cell chorionic vasculitis and acute chorionic vasculitis can be seen and histologically distinguished in the same case. The paper shows how differing interpretations of inclusion and exclusion criteria by investigators have affected estimates of the incidence of this rare lesion. There is a need to harmonize diagnostic criteria; the report describes how cases with both entities can be documented carefully.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".