MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321995522 · doi:10.14740/jmc4033

Pericardial Tamponade in a Patient With a History of Pneumonectomy

2023· article· en· W4321995522 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicholas George, Brian Chin, Jamshid Mistry, Rodney Borger, Fanglong Dong, Michael Neeki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPericarditis and Cardiac Tamponade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTamponadePneumonectomySurgeryLungInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shock is the clinical presentation of circulatory failure with impaired perfusion that results in inadequate cellular oxygen utilization. Treatment requires properly identifying the type of shock that is impacting the patient (obstructive, distributive, cardiogenic, and/or hypovolemic). Complex cases may involve numerous contributors to each type of shock and/or multiple types of shock which can present interesting diagnostic and management challenges to the clinician. In this case report, we present a 54-year-old male with a remote history of a right lung pneumonectomy presenting with multifactorial shock including cardiac tamponade, with initial compression of the expanding pericardial effusion by the postoperative fluid accumulation within the right hemithorax. While in the emergency department, the patient gradually became hypotensive with worsening tachycardia and dyspnea. A bedside echocardiogram revealed an increase in size of the pericardial effusion. An emergent ultrasound-guided pericardial drain was inserted with gradual improvement of his hemodynamics followed by placement of thoracostomy tube. This unique case highlights the importance of utilizing point-of-care ultrasound along with emergent intervention in critical resuscitation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicPericarditis and Cardiac TamponadeFrench-language works237,207