MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985950461 · doi:10.1182/blood-2005-12-4795

Natural history of cerebral vein thrombosis: a systematic review

2006· review· en· W1985950461 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesco Dentali, Monica Gianni, Mark Crowther, Walter Ageno

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineNatural historyThrombosisDeep veinMortality rateIncidence (geometry)DiseasePediatricsMEDLINESurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Cerebral vein thrombosis (CVT) has been considered, until a few years ago, an uncommon disease with significant long-term morbidity and high mortality rate. New noninvasive diagnostic techniques have increased the frequency with which this disease is diagnosed; despite this, there continues to be little data on its natural history. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the mortality rate, the rate of disability at long-term follow-up, and the incidence of recurrence after a first episode of CVT; to determine clinical and radiologic predictors of death and dependence; and to identify possible risk factors for recurrence. ( DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, reference lists of selected articles and authors' libraries.) Nineteen studies were identified. Mortality rate during peri-hospitalization period is 5.6% (range, 0%-15.2%) and 9.4% (range, 0%-39%) at the end of follow-up period. Eighty-eight percent of surviving patients recover completely or have only a mild functional or cognitive deficit. Two thirds of patients with CVT recanalized within the first few months after presentation, and 2.8% (range, 0%-11.7%) had objectively confirmed recurrence. We conclude that patients with CVT have a low risk of death and that most patients have a good long-term prognosis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations244
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207