MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323350927 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.140

A140 ECTOPIC SPLEEN PRESENTING AS A GASTRIC SUBMUCOSAL LESION

2023· article· en· W4323350927 on OpenAlexaff
I Balubaid, A Almudaires, Michael Sey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEsophagogastroduodenoscopySubmucosaPathologyAccessory spleenContext (archaeology)BiopsyEndoscopic ultrasoundStomachLesionMalignancySpleenSplenectomyRadiologyEndoscopyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Accessory spleen is ectopic splenic tissue which can be either congenital or acquired. It is usually an asymptomatic incidental finding. In the context of known malignancy, accessory spleen can be mistaken for metastasis. Purpose Here, we share a case of ectopic spleen presenting as a gastric subepithelial lesion post splenectomy. Rare cases have been reported in the literature. Method Case Report and Literature Review Result(s) Case: A middle age male with history of splenic rupture secondary to a motor vehicle accident and metastatic renal cancer was found to have a gastric subepithelial lesion on endoscopy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) revealed a subepithelial mass coming off the submucosa or muscularis mucosa of the gastric wall with intact muscularis propria. EUS-guided core biopsy was performed and demonstrated splenic tissue Conclusion(s) Splenic tissue should be considered in the differential diagnosis when assessing gastric subepithelial tumors even in the context of previous trauma to the spleen. In addition, EUS-guided core biopsy may be required to rule out metastatic disease. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared ESOPHAGEAL, GASTRIC & DUODENAL DISORDERS

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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 the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207