MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386410993 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2022-253751

Exercise-induced deep vein thrombosis in the subclavian vein in an elite female athlete

2023· article· en· W4386410993 on OpenAlexaff
Jacqueline Blunt, Laura Avila, Michael Temple, Jane S Thornton

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubclavian veinAxillary veinBasilic VeinSurgeryThoracic outlet syndromeCervical ribRib cageThoracic outletThrombusThrombosisRadiologyDeep veinVenous thrombosisThrombolysisVeinCatheterCardiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An adolescent female presented to the emergency room with pain, swelling and a palpable lump in the right axilla following activity on a rowing ergometer. The differential diagnosis at the time of presentation was deep vein thrombosis, mass compression and cellulitis. An ultrasound scan revealed an occlusive thrombus of the right axillary and subclavian veins, basilic vein and proximal cephalic vein. The patient underwent pharmacomechanical thrombolysis followed by catheter-directed thrombolysis. Dynamic venogram testing revealed venous thoracic outlet syndrome (VTOS) and a transaxillary first rib resection was performed to decompress the costoclavicular space. Genetic testing revealed the patient was heterozygous for factor V Leiden. Two rounds of balloon dilatation plasty were performed to relieve recurring symptoms due to scarring and persisting compression, 1 and 3 years post rib resection. After extensive shared decision-making, the patient returned to sport, reporting only intermittent symptoms of post-thrombotic syndrome. This case sheds light on the importance of early diagnosis of VTOS for successful return to sport.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.363
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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207