MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517292411 · doi:10.1002/hed.23675

Atypical presentation of Eagle syndrome with hypoglossal nerve palsy and Horner syndrome

2014· article· en· W1517292411 on OpenAlexaff
Yaël Bensoussan, Laurent Létourneau‐Guillon, Tareck Ayad

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOropharyngeal Anatomy and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHorner syndromeHypoglossal nerveAtrophySurgeryAnatomyParalysisCranial nervesPalsyPresentation (obstetrics)TonguePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many nerve injuries have been associated with Eagle syndrome. The cranial nerves V, VII, IX, and X have been reported to be injured by the elongated styloid process in this syndrome. METHODS: We describe a case of Eagle syndrome with atypical symptoms of hypoglossal nerve palsy and Horner syndrome. RESULTS: A 56-year-old woman presented with right hypoglossal nerve palsy, right Horner syndrome, right neck pain, and symptoms mimicking transient cerebral ischemia. An angioscan showed elongated styloid process bilaterally with the right process compressing the right carotid artery causing a 75% stenosis. After an en bloc resection of the right styloid process, there were no further episodes of paresthesias. The neck pain completely disappeared, as well as the Horner syndrome. As for the hemitongue, the fasciculations disappeared but the atrophy remained. CONCLUSION: This is the first Eagle syndrome case report describing a motor paralysis of a cranial nerve.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations32
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicOropharyngeal Anatomy and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207