MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1584360948 · doi:10.1002/9781118560730.ch5

Treatment of Hemorrhagic Stroke

2013· other· en· W1584360948 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas H. Kramer

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntracerebral hemorrhageSubarachnoid hemorrhageStuporStroke (engine)Coma (optics)Intensive care medicineCerebral edemaAnesthesiaHydrocephalusPulmonary edemaHypoxemiaHematomaCardiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) account for about 10–20% of strokes. Compared with ischemic stroke, neurological impairment tends to be more severe and outcomes are generally worse. An improved understanding of the pathophysiology of these conditions has increased the therapeutic options. With ICH, efforts focus on reducing early hematoma expansion and attenuating perihematomal edema. With SAH, clinicians must seek to prevent aneurysm rebleeding and limit both early and delayed ischemic injury. Prevention and timely recognition and treatment of potential causes of secondary brain injury, such as hydrocephalus, nonconvulsive seizures, intracranial hypertension, fever, anemia, hypoxemia, hypotension and hypo- or hyperglycemia, is crucial in maximizing the chance of a favorable recovery. Systemic complications, such as neurogenic stunned myocardium and pulmonary edema, must be recognized and treated appropriately. For patients with stupor and coma, physicians should communicate regularly with surrogate decision makers. Assessment of patients' prognosis should be transparent, based on best available evidence, and neither unrealistically optimistic nor pessimistic.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.007

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207