A case of laryngopharyngeal reflux: CT characterization in the acute setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A case of supraglottic thickening and edema in a patient with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is presented. Symptoms included odynophagia and dysphagia acutely worse over the past 1 day prior to presentation, with recurrent vomiting and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) over the past week. The patient underwent nasopharyngolaryngoscopy (NPL) and CT imaging to evaluate potential airway compromise or masses. Both CT and NPL demonstrated supraglottic swelling, with CT further revealing esophageal wall thickening and inflammation. CT findings of LPR are uncommonly reported, since diagnosis of LPR is typically based on clinical symptoms, direct observation (laryngoscopy), and reflux testing. LPR may be considered as part of the differential for laryngeal edema in the appropriate clinical setting, and awareness of this condition will aid in assessment for related imaging findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".