Bilateral Sternalis Muscles: The Clinical Significance of This Rare Discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report explores the physical characteristics and clinical significance of the sternalis muscle, an uncommon anatomical variation of the anterior thoracic wall. If present, the sternalis muscle may distort diagnostic images and can be associated with incorrect interpretation of such medical images, misdiagnoses, and even surgical complications. As such, enhancing clinicians' knowledge of this muscle and improving its recognition is of the utmost importance. In this case report, a rare bilateral sternalis muscle that was discovered during an educational human cadaveric dissection of a 73-year-old Black male is described. The right sternalis muscle fibres extended from the mid-sternal level to the right sternocostal arch, measuring 11.5 cm in length and 3.4 cm at its largest width. In contrast, the smaller left sternalis muscle fibres measured only 5.6 cm in length and 1.2 cm at its greatest width. This rare bilateral presentation of the sternalis muscle is documented in approximately one-third of all reported sternalis cases with an associated estimated prevalence as low as 1.7% among the general population. Serving as a reminder of the intricate anatomical complexities that continue to challenge and intrigue medical professionals, this report advocates for continued education of anatomical variations to enhance patient care and medical practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".