MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967953145 · doi:10.1159/000120808

Computer Modeling of Siphoning for CSF Shunt Design Evaluation

2008· article· en· W1967953145 on OpenAlex
James M. Drake, G. Tenti, S. Sivalsganathan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Neurosurgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShunt (medical)Cerebrospinal fluidMedicineIntracranial pressureHydrocephalusCompartment (ship)Cerebrospinal fluid pressureBiomedical engineeringSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computer model of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) compartment and various shunt designs was developed to simulate CSF dynamics, particularly in the upright position in which siphoning is known to occur. This novel mathematical model of the CSF compartment incorporates negative pressure and volume components that permit simulation of siphoning. The model was tested with data from a previously reported animal experiment. The correspondence between the model simulation and the reported intracranial pressure and CSF shunt flow rate was very good. A simulation of a shunted hydrocephalic patient in the recumbent and upright position was then carried out to examine the effects of a standard shunt valve, an externally adjustable valve, a variable resistance valve, and an antisiphon device. The resulting pressure profiles, which conformed to previously reported data, indicate that this model would be useful for the evaluation of current and future shunt designs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.169 · 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