MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pneumonia fúngica por Aspergillus spp. em cão - relato de caso

2022· article· pt· W4303614492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda Junior Jorge, Isadora Campos Portella, Carolina Magri Ferraz, Igor Luiz Salardani Senhorello, Laura Conti

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Case Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePneumoniaGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pneumonia é uma das afecções de sistema respiratório mais comuns na rotina clínica de Medicina Veterinária, sendo caracterizada pelo processo inflamatório e/ou infeccioso do pulmão, atingindo brônquios, bronquíolos e alvéolos. Essa afecção pode ser causada por diversas etiologias, como bacteriana e fúngica, tendo as infecções fúngicas com menor incidência. O objetivo deste trabalho foi relatar um caso de pneumonia causada por fungo em cão, demonstrando os sinais clínicos, diagnóstico e tratamento do animal. Foi atendido em um Hospital Veterinário no município de Vila Velha, Espírito Santo, um canino, macho, Labrador, de 13 anos apresentando tosse persistente e dispneia expiratória, com histórico de tratamentos anteriores com antibióticos, corticóides e antitussígenos sem evolução positiva. O paciente foi submetido a realização de lavado broncoalveolar e amostras enviadas para análise citológica, cultura fúngica e bacteriana, tendo como diagnóstico a cultura fúngica positiva para Aspergillus. A partir do diagnóstico foi iniciado o tratamento com itraconazol 10mg/kg a cada 24 horas durante 30 dias. Foi realizado acompanhamento clínico e radiográfico no paciente, sendo observada melhora significativa imaginológica e clínica.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of Case ReportsSame topicMicrobial infections and disease researchFrench-language works237,207