MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400295208 · doi:10.1002/ccr3.9156

One‐year follow‐up of amputation as a curative treatment for body integrity dysphoria: A case report

2024· article· en· W4400295208 on OpenAlexaff
N Nadeau

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBody Image and Dysmorphia Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Bas-Saint-Laurent
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmputationMedicineDysphoriaQuality of life (healthcare)Gender dysphoriaDistressPsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyAnxietyGender identityNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key Clinical Message: Elective amputation as a treatment for Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) or Body Integrity Dysphoria (BID) where noninvasive treatments prove ineffective and the patient's distress is substantial, may permit long-term remission of symptoms at follow-up. Abstract: We present the one-year follow-up post-surgery of an ambidextrous male who sought elective amputation of his left hand's fourth and fifth fingers after an unsuccessful trial of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy for Body Integrity Dysphoria. He had no psychiatric comorbidities. At one-year follow-up, his dysphoria was still in remission. He exhibited full adaptation in his social and occupational life, demonstrating increased ease in hand use compared to pre-amputation. He reported sleeping well, happiness, good health and continued acceptance by friends and family. This one-year post-surgery follow-up, at 22 years old, underscores the efficacy of amputation as a curative treatment, high patient satisfaction, and the quality of life gained through the procedure.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 Case ReportsSame topicBody Image and Dysmorphia StudiesFrench-language works237,207