MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392460093 · doi:10.1111/jsap.13713

Intramural gastric abscesses in a dog

2024· article· en· W4392460093 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ignacio Otero Balda, Monica Augusto, Caroline Lassaigne, Marie Pauline Maurin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCurvatures of the stomachVomitingAbscessForeign bodyAnorexiaHistopathologyStomachSurgeryPeritonitisGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 6-year-old, female neutered Labrador retriever was presented with a chronic history of vomiting and anorexia. Abdominal ultrasound identified two large cavitated structures with echogenic content in the gastric fundus and pyloric region. CT revealed the intraparietal nature of these structures, one in the greater curvature and another one extending from the lesser curvature to the pyloric antrum. Surgical exploration revealed two areas of thickened gastric wall with intramural purulent material. Debridement and partial resection of the abscess (deroofing) were performed via a routine gastrotomy approach. Histopathology of a gastric wall sample revealed neutrophilic inflammation with intralesional vegetal foreign body. The presence of intralesional foreign body with a positive bacterial culture and macroscopic absence of peritonitis may suggest an intramural migrating vegetal foreign body. Gastric wall abscess should be included in a differential diagnosis in dogs with a history of chronic vomiting and the presence of gastric wall cavitated structures. Surgical debridement through a routine gastrotomy opening alleviated the clinical signs related to the intramural gastric abscesses in this dog with no recurrence at 22 months.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Small Animal PracticeSame topicGastrointestinal disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207