MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252227437 · doi:10.14740/jmc2212w

Oligomeganephronia in an Adult Presenting With Features of Chronic Kidney Disease

2015· article· en· W4252227437 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yoichi Iwafuchi, Takashi Morita, Tetsuo Morioka, Takeshi Kamura, Yuko Oyama, Ichiei Narita

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlomerulosclerosisKidney diseaseFocal segmental glomerulosclerosisBiopsyPathologyKidneyRenal biopsyUrologyInternal medicineGlomerulonephritisProteinuria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the case of a 29-year-old man with oligomeganephronia (OMN) who presented with symptoms of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Radiological and ultrasound images showed bilateral mildly small and uneven kidneys. Right renal biopsy was performed. Under light microscopy, the number of glomeruli in histological samples was decreased and the remaining glomeruli were markedly enlarged without mesangial proliferation. The obsolescent glomeruli had findings compatible with segmental sclerosis. Tubules were dilated and enlarged, and there was a presumptive primitive duct enclosed by a smooth muscle collar. Dysplastic changes in the biopsy specimen suggested that the cause of the patient’s small kidneys was a congenital anomaly rather than acquired kidney disease. OMN is one of the probable causes of CKD in adults. Angiotensin type II receptor blockers may be an effective treatment for focal segmental glomerulosclerosis due to OMN. J Med Cases. 2015;6(8):362-366 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc2212w

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesFrench-language works237,207