Relationship of brain parenchyma within the caudal cranial fossa and ventricle size to syringomyelia in cavalier King Charles spaniels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess if the volumes of the caudal cranial fossa (CCF), parenchyma within the caudal cranial fossa (CCFP) or ventricles (V) are associated with syringomyelia (SM) in cavalier King Charles spaniels (CKCS) with Chiari-like malformation (CM). To evaluate if volumes are associated with transverse syrinx width. METHODS: Magnetic resonance images of 59 CKCS with CM were retrospectively reviewed and grouped with or without SM. Three-dimensional images were created and volumes of the fossae, brain parenchyma and ventricular system were calculated from which percentages of CCF, CCFP and V were created. If present, syrinx size was measured from its maximal transverse width. The percentages were statistically compared between groups, and correlation between percentages and syrinx dimensions was made. RESULTS: CKCS with SM had significantly higher CCFP (P=0.0001) and V (P=0.0002) to those without but no significant difference in CCF (P=0.925). There was a positive correlation between CCFP and syrinx width (Pearson r=0.437) and ventricle size to syrinx width (Spearman r=0.627). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A more marked overcrowding of the CCF is associated with SM, which may explain the high incidence of SM in CKCS with CM. The association between ventricle and syrinx dimensions supports the theory that SM development is the result of altered cerebrospinal fluid dynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".