MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394755748 · doi:10.5946/ce.2023.268

Polyposis of gastrointestinal tract after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination: a report of two cases

2024· article· en· W4394755748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jun Ho Kim, Eun Hye Oh, Dong Soo Han

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Endoscopy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGastrointestinal tractDiseaseVaccinationInternal medicineGastroenterologyDermatologyAdverse effectGastrointestinal bleedingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cronkhite-Canada syndrome is a rare gastrointestinal polyposis syndrome with distinctive clinical features and endoscopic findings. Diagnosis can be challenging without suspicion, and the disease carries high mortality due to complications such as infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, and malignancies. This paper presents two cases of Cronkhite-Canada syndrome occurring after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccination. Both cases exhibited typical clinical findings, including hypogeusia, onychodystrophy, alopecia, and weight loss. Typical polyposis in the gastrointestinal tract was confirmed through endoscopies. As symptomatic treatment did not improve the symptoms, corticosteroids were administered, and symptoms and laboratory test results improved immediately. The patients improved upon corticosteroids tapering. These cases illustrate typical presentations of Cronkhite-Canada syndrome and the course of the disease following corticosteroid treatment. Additionally, they suggest the possibility that Cronkhite-Canada syndrome may be triggered by COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.

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)0.003
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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 venueClinical EndoscopySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207