MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236309577 · doi:10.14740/jmc2633w

Splenic Abscess and Management Options: Report of Four Cases

2016· article· en· W4236309577 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Al-Jabali, Bandar Ali, Abdallah Al-Zahrani, Tagreed Al-Ajai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneousAbscessSplenectomySurgeryMortality rateGeneral surgeryRadiologySpleenInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abscess of the spleen is a rather clinical rarity with reported mortality rate up to 47%. The timely and widespread use of imaging methods facilitates early diagnosis and guides treatment, thus improving the prognosis. Most of patients were with recognized risk factors including conditions that compromise the immune system, trauma and intravenous drug abuse in addicts. The surgical treatment by splenectomy is usually the first choice of treatment but percutaneous drainage is the valid option. Splenic abscess is an unusual and potentially life-threatening disease with a diagnostic challenge due to the non-specific clinical picture and diagnosis is confirmed based mostly on imaging studies. Splenic abscesses are very rarely encountered in surgical practice with a reported high mortality rate in neglected and untreated cases. Percutaneous drainage is a valid option and safe procedure for patients with splenic abscess. J Med Cases. 2016;7(10):432-434 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jmc2633w

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207