MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401660027 · doi:10.7759/cureus.67085

Chewing Gum in the Larynx: Foreign Body Aspiration or Iatrogenic Artifact? Challenges in Determining the Cause of Death in a Road Traffic Accident Victim With Resuscitation Intervention

2024· article· en· W4401660027 on OpenAlexaff
Pushwant S Mattu, Matthew M. Orde

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalCanadian Association of Nurses in OncologyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntubationChokingAirwayForeign bodyLarynxIntensive care medicineAutopsyCause of deathPulmonary aspirationMedical emergencySurgeryPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying the cause of death in road traffic incidents and the contributing factors is crucial for forensic investigations, public health research, and epidemiological studies. In this case, the discovery of chewing gum in the larynx during an autopsy complicated the forensic diagnostic process and challenged the determination of the primary cause of death. Our case report details a 53-year-old male driver involved in a fatal road traffic accident. First responders found him unconscious and unresponsive. Despite resuscitative efforts, including endotracheal intubation, he could not be revived. The autopsy revealed multiple blunt force injuries from the collision and chewing gum in the larynx. The gum may have been aspirated while driving, potentially causing choking, severe coughing, or reflex cardiac arrest, which could have led to sudden incapacitation and the accident. Alternatively, the gum might have been overlooked during intubation, possibly pushing it deeper into the airway and creating an iatrogenic artifact. The cause of death was attributed to multiple blunt force injuries, specifically head trauma. However, the possibility of foreign body aspiration leading to the accident or the gum being an iatrogenic artifact cannot be ruled out. This case report highlights the potential impact of airway foreign bodies on road accidents and the risk of iatrogenic artifacts during resuscitation. It underscores the importance of thorough airway evaluation, prompt recognition of potential obstructions, and accurate documentation in prehospital settings to prevent worsening obstructions, misdiagnoses, delays in diagnosis, and complications in future cases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→