MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964457788 · doi:10.1177/197140091202500611

Pediatric Inflammatory Diseases

2012· article· en· W1964457788 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandra Splendiani, Alessia Catalucci, Nicola Limbucci, M. Turner, Timo Krings, Michele Gallucci

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Neuroradiology Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasculitisMedicineDifferential diagnosisCerebral vasculitisPathologyCentral nervous systemAngiographyBrain biopsyMagnetic resonance angiographyDiseaseRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central nervous system (CNS) vasculitis can affect both adults and children, but some of these occur almost exclusively in childhood. In children may develop as a primary condition or secondary to an underlying systemic disease. Cerebral vasculitis can be classified on the basis of the diameter of the involved vessels, although there is no univocal consensus. The diagnosis of CNS vasculitis is particularly difficult because the available investigative modalities have limited sensitivities and specificities. The most helpful diagnostic tests include cerebrospinal fluid analysis, MRI (MR angiography/venography (MRA/MRV) of the brain, and angiography. However, brain biopsy may be required to diagnose small vessel vasculitis in order to make differential diagnosis with a wide range of conditions, such as degenerative vasculopathies, embolic diseases, or coagulation disorders. This paper discusses on current understanding of most frequent primary and secondary central nervous system vasculitis in children in which are involved small vessel.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Neuroradiology JournalSame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207