Is A Plexiform Neurofibroma Pathognomonic of Neurofibromatosis Type I?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Several prominent textbooks have claimed that a plexiform neurofibroma is pathognomonic for neurofibromatosis type I. This is not in agreement with the National Institutes of Health criteria, which require two signs to be present, one of which can be a plexiform neurofibroma. Is a plexiform neurofibroma pathognomonic for neurofibromatosis type I? STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: Fifty-one patients with surgically resected plexiform neurofibromas between the years 1991 and 2001 were identified, and their charts reviewed. The presence and absence of any manifestation of neurofibromatosis type I as detailed in the National Institutes of Health criteria were recorded. The pathology database at the Hospital for Sick Children (HSC) was searched retrospectively. RESULTS: Five of the 51 patients had a single solitary plexiform neurofibroma. They were followed at the neurofibromatosis clinic at the HSC with regular detailed examinations and no other stigmata were found. CONCLUSION: Although plexiform neurofibromas are highly suggestive of neurofibromatosis type I, they are not pathognomonic as claimed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".