MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcranial Doppler Microembolic Signal Monitoring is Useful in Diagnosis and Treatment of Carotid Artery Dissection: Two Case Reports

2007· article· en· W1969089860 on OpenAlex
Jayanta Roy, Naveed Akhtar, Timothy Watson, Andrew M. Demchuk, Maher Saqqur

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

VenueJournal of Neuroimaging · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTranscranial DopplerDissection (medical)Carotid artery dissectionStroke (engine)RadiologyCarotid arteriesCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arterial dissection is the underlying stroke mechanism in approximately 2.5% of all strokes and the second leading cause of stroke in patients younger than 45 years of age. Controversy exists regarding the medical management of carotid dissection. Both anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents have been used with no compelling data supporting one therapy over the other. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) emboli monitoring may help in establishing the diagnosis and guide the treatment by measuring the frequency of microembolic signals (MES). We present two cases of carotid dissection where TCD monitoring for MES helped in establishing the diagnosis and proved useful in identifying that standard anticoagulation treatment was not preventing emboli. Both cases were also monitored for emboli count reduction with subsequent antiplatelet therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · 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