MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1986733505 · doi:10.4021//jmc.v4i2.936

Shoulder Palsy due to Middle Cerebral Artery Embolism

2012· article· en· W1986733505 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hiromasa Tsuda, Sayaka Nagao, Yuto Yamazaki, Kozue Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMiddle cerebral arteryPalsyInfarctionCardiologyEmbolismMagnetic resonance imagingIschemiaRadiologyPathologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An 80-year-old Japanese woman with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation suddenly developed sensory aphasia, with moderate weakness restricted to the right shoulder with normal muscle strength in the elbow, wrist and fingers. There were no other neurological abnormalities. Diffusion-weighted cranial magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated scattered infarct lesions in the territory of the left middle cerebral artery (MCA), probably due to cardiogenic embolism. Right-sided shoulder palsy might have been caused by a localized infarct lesion in the precentral gyrus on the left side, and resolved within 10 days. Because the area corresponding to the shoulder is small in the primary motor cortex, isolated shoulder palsy due to cortical infarction is very rare. Its etiology remains controversial, but borderzone ischemia between the anterior cerebral artery and MCA, and atherothrombosis of the cortical branch of MCA are proposed. Our case shows that the area corresponding to the shoulder receives blood from the cortical branch of MCA. J Med Cases. 2013;4(2):86-88 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/jmc936w

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→