MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384694372 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxad047

Is this hypercalcemia causing poor weight in this infant?

2023· article· en· W4384694372 on OpenAlexaffabout
Celia Rodd

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChild healthHealth sciencePediatricsLibrary scienceFamily medicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case: You are a community paediatrician seeing a 28-day-old newborn for poor weight gain. At 14 days, she was slightly below birth weight, prompting additional assessment. A first-born child, she was breastfed and takes 400 International Units of vitamin D daily. A review of systems and physical examination did not provide additional clues. Perinatal history was uncomplicated, and the mother is a healthy 28-year-old. Due to your concerns, you order some investigations. These include normal serum sodium, potassium, chloride, albumin, creatinine, urea, and phosphorus. The total calcium is 2.70 mmol/L. The blood gas to ascertain acid-base status showed a normal pH, but the ionized calcium was 1.43 mmol/L. Urine analysis was normal. You suspect that she has hypercalcemia causing borderline weight gain. Hypercalcemia typically presents with non-specific findings, such as impaired feeding and poor weight gain. Since you believe typical total calcium concentrations in children are 2.2 to 2.58 mmol/L, a value of 2.70 mmol/L with ionized calcium at 1.43 mmol/L are both concerning.

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)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207