MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2015372060 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100006399

Reversible Parinaud Syndrome Following Intraventricular Thrombolysis

2009· article· en· W2015372060 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert Laforce, Hélène T. Khuong, Jean‐Luc Gariépy, Geneviève Milot, Martin Savard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsHôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlasgow Coma ScaleIntraventricular hemorrhageSubarachnoid hemorrhageEmbolizationThrombolysisVomitingRadiologySurgeryMidline shiftComa (optics)Superior cerebellar arteryAneurysmAnesthesiaComputed tomographyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 57-year-old daycare educator presented as a drowsy but oriented individual with a history of sudden and severe headache associated with vomiting. She had no previous medical or neurological history. Examination showed no focal signs and routine laboratory studies were unremarkable. Head computed tomogram (CT) revealed a Fisher grade IV subarachnoid hemorrhage in the posterior fossa with extensive intraventricular hemorrhage (Graeb 8/12, see Figures 1A and 1B) which was shown to originate from a left Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery (PICA) aneurysm on CT angiography and treated successfully with endovascular embolization. Five days later she deteriorated her level of consciousness (Glascow coma scale [GCS] 8/15). The CT scan showed moderate hydrocephalus and a ventricular drain was placed. She improved clinically but remained disoriented with slowed information processing skills.

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)0.004
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
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications→French-language works237,207→