MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317480227 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2022-252168

Monkeypox-associated proctitis and rectal wall perforation

2023· article· en· W4317480227 on OpenAlexaff
Lottie Brown, Christopher Delaney, Alison Hainsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMonkeypoxMedicinePerforationProctitisSurgeryIncidence (geometry)DiseaseInternal medicineUlcerative colitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monkeypox is a viral zoonotic infection which has rapidly increased in incidence and spread globally since May 2022. There have been reports of rectal complications of monkeypox but so far these are not well not understood. Here, we describe a case of rectal pain in HIV-positive man with confirmed monkeypox. MRI on day 5 of hospital admission revealed proctitis with localised perforation. The patient was treated with tecovirimat, antibiotics, analgesia and laxatives and improved without requiring surgical intervention. All patients presenting with new rectal symptoms and deemed high-risk for monkeypox should be isolated and screened for the disease, and appropriate personal protective equipment should be worn by healthcare professionals caring for them. Clinicians should have a low threshold for cross-sectional imaging in patients with confirmed or suspected monkeypox who experience persistent and severe rectal symptoms or who become systemically unwell to investigate for complications such as perforation and abscess formation. The vast majority of monkeypox cases do not require antibiotics and their use should be reserved for patients who show signs of secondary bacterial infection or sepsis.

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207