MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224279410 · doi:10.1159/000524191

Infantile Appendicitis: A Deceptive Challenge with Disastrous Consequences

2022· article· en· W4224279410 on OpenAlexaff
Thambirajah Balachandra, Amal Nishantha Vadysinghe, Consolato Sergi

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Gastroenterology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaOffice of the Chief Medical ExaminerUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronerMedical examinerAutopsyPediatricsAppendicitisAcute appendicitisMedical recordCause of deathGeneral surgerySurgeryEmergency medicineDiseaseInternal medicinePoison controlInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute appendicitis (AA) in neonates and infants is an infrequent event. In day-to-day practice, death due to AA is hardly ever reported to a coroner or a medical examiner. Here, we report on an 8-month-old infant assigned to the medical examiner as the death occurred within 10 days of a surgical procedure. The cause of death was undetermined. Autopsy revealed gross and histologic features of AA. A postmortem review of the medical records showed signs and symptoms consistent with AA. On the other hand, a recent history of upper respiratory tract infection followed by clinical diagnosis and treatment by a community pediatrician probably blindsided the hospital physicians. This case illustrates the challenges of AA in infancy. The literature review revealed that a misdiagnosis of AA is more likely to occur on several occasions. They include patients who present "atypically," patients who are not thoroughly examined, patients receiving antipyretic or analgesic medication and discharged, those diagnosed as having gastroenteritis, and patients who do not receive an appropriate discharge or follow-up instructions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in GastroenterologySame topicAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207