MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W91601700

Primary low-grade B-cell lymphoma of the urinary bladder: case report and literature review.

2002· article· en· W91601700 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel D Cohen, Claudine Lamarre, L Lamarre, Fred Saad FS

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphomaUrinary bladderMALT lymphomaUrinary systemPathologyMarginal zoneMalignant lymphomaMucosa-associated lymphoid tissueInternal medicineB cellImmunologyAntibody
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first recorded case of lymphoma of the bladder was reported by Eve and Chaffey in 1885. Malignant lymphoma of the bladder can be classified into one of three different clinical groups: 1) Primary lymphoma localized to the bladder; 2) Lymphoma presenting in the bladder as the first sign of disseminated disease (non-localized lymphoma); 3) Recurrent bladder involvement by lymphoma in patients with a history of malignant lymphoma (secondary lymphoma). Primary extranodal marginal zone lymphoma of mucosa associated lymphoid tissue (MALT type) of the urinary bladder, first described by Kempton et al in 1990, is the most common primary bladder lymphoma and associated with an excellent prognosis. We present a patient with gross hematuria who was found to have a primary bladder lymphoma and review the relevant literature.

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)0.001
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→