MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409413557 · doi:10.1097/paf.0000000000001037

Incidental Autopsy Finding of Intraosseous Dermoid Cyst With Craniosynostosis

2025· article· en· W4409413557 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Waszyn, Michael Belenky

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & Pathology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTeratomas and Epidermoid Cysts
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDermoid cystMedicineAutopsyAnatomyPopulationCoronal sutureFibrous jointCystCraniosynostosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Dermoid cysts are benign developmental anomalies that are typically cutaneous and occur along lines of embryonic closure. Rarely, intraosseous dermoid cysts can occur in the pediatric population. This report presents an incidental finding of an intraosseous dermoid cyst found during autopsy in the frontal bone of a 3-year-old female patient who died by drowning. The cyst measured 1.2 × 0.7 × 0.6 cm and was located along the sagittal suture. Histopathologic examination of the cyst revealed keratinized stratified squamous epithelium alongside sebaceous glands and hair follicles, confirming the diagnosis of dermoid cyst. Premature closure of all cranial sutures, or craniosynostosis, was also noted. This unique combination of findings may indicate an etiological connection, which may warrant further research. Furthermore, this report provides rare photographs while most intraosseous dermoid cysts are only captured via radiography. From a forensic pathology perspective, incidental findings like these can provide critical insights into congenital anomalies that may impact the family, future research, or medicolegal conclusions, highlighting the broader relevance of thorough autopsies. Moreover, incidental findings such as this case contribute to the growing need for forensic guidelines on how to manage and document unexpected discoveries during investigations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & PathologySame topicTeratomas and Epidermoid CystsFrench-language works237,207