MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384524191 · doi:10.4081/reumatismo.2023.1570

Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes, and gout

2023· article· en· W4384524191 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ernesto Damiani

Bibliographic record

VenueReumatismo · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric Acid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdventureQuarter (Canadian coin)Context (archaeology)GoutMedical literatureWifeLiteraturePsychoanalysisArt historyHistoryArtPsychologyPathologyTheologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes, was an experienced physician who treated gouty patients. A gouty character appears in The Adventure of the Missing Three-Quarter, a Sherlock Holmes novel. This offers the possibility of discussing gout from the peculiar perspective of a medical writer in light of the historical-medical context of the time. This study was conducted using Conan Doyle's autobiographical, scientific, and literary primary sources, as well as past and current medical literature. The Adventure of the Missing Three-Quarter was autobiographical. Conan Doyle himself was a rugby player and his wife died of tuberculosis. Furthermore, in 1884, in The Lancet, he described the hereditary case of a female gouty patient, presenting with ocular manifestations. In agreement with the concept of rich man's gout, the gouty patient of Sherlock Holmes' story, Lord Mount James, was a rich irascible noble but he was not addicted to the pleasures of food and sex. Following the usual funny representation of gouty patients, Conan Doyle made fun of Lord Mount James, but he misquoted a true case of gout cited in the literature. In his scientific and literary production on gout, Conan Doyle stuck to the most updated medical concepts of the time, demonstrating an uncommon knowledge of scientific literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueReumatismoSame topicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric AcidFrench-language works237,207