MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132888083

Resección endoscópica de leiomiosarcoma traqueal en un perro

2022· article· es· W7132888083 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arbey Aristizábal, Carlos Andrés Hernández

Bibliographic record

VenueRepositorio CES · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Congenital diseaseWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En el presente informe se describe el caso de un paciente canino de raza Labrador Retriever de 12 años que presentaba disnea severa y cianosis no responsiva a tratamiento médico con presencia de tejido radiodenso evidente por rayos X en el tercio proximal de la tráquea compatible con neoformación, por lo cual se indicó traqueoscopia con fines diagnósticos y terapéuticos. Durante la traqueoscopia se encontró una masa pediculada ocupando el 80% de la luz traqueal. Se realizó resección completa desde el pedículo mediante pinza de polipectomía, corte y coagulación monopolar y se realizó el rescate de la masa con cesta endoscópica para recuperación de pólipos. El análisis histopatológico de la estructura reveló un leiomiosarcoma, de presentación inusual en tráquea. La resección endoscópica de leiomiosarcoma traqueal no ha sido reportada en el país y hay escasos reportes a nivel mundial, por lo que la difusión del caso resulta interesante en el medio académico, ya que se está mostrando la posibilidad de intervenciones en tráquea por medio de métodos quirúrgicos no invasivos y se reporta una localización poco común para un leiomiosarcoma, logrando así proponer este trabajo como referencia para futuros profesionales que manejen casos con características similares.

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)0.001
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.322 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepositorio CESSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207