MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411973125 · doi:10.1186/s12245-025-00930-3

Case of scombroid syndrome mimicking an anaphylactic fish allergy

2025· article· en· W4411973125 on OpenAlexaff
Véronique Gingras, Louis Marois

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research NetworkUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAllergyFish <Actinopterygii>AnaphylaxisDermatologyAngiologyAngioedemaImmunologyInternal medicineFisheryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Scombroid syndrome, a pseudo-allergic reaction caused by histamine-contaminated fish, is often mistaken for type I hypersensitivity reactions due to overlapping clinical presentations. Unlike IgE-mediated anaphylaxis, Scombroid syndrome results from histamine production by bacterial histidine decarboxylase in improperly preserved fish. It accounts for 5% of U.S. food poisoning cases and manifests within 30 min to two hours post-ingestion. CASE PRESENTATION: Symptoms include rash, pruritus, vomiting, and tongue swelling, as exemplified by a case of a 30-year-old woman misdiagnosed with anaphylaxis after consuming salmon. However, typically mild and self-limiting, severe cases may involve bronchospasm and arrhythmias. Diagnosis hinges on patient history, symptom onset, and absence of food allergy markers, such as elevated tryptase. Management includes antihistamines and supportive care; epinephrine and corticosteroids are reserved for severe reactions. CONCLUSION: Clinicians must distinguish Scombroid syndrome from anaphylaxis to ensure accurate treatment, emphasizing proper fish preservation to prevent outbreaks.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207