MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016808224 · doi:10.1016/j.carj.2009.09.002

Cavum Septi Pellucidi in Boxers

2009· article· en· W2016808224 on OpenAlexaff
Richard I. Aviv, George Tomlinson, B. E. Kendall, Chandrashekhar Thakkar, A. R. Valentine

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFornixMagnetic resonance imagingAtrophyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Controversy exists over the significance of the isolated finding of cavum septi pellucidi (CSP) and its prevalence rate in healthy individuals and in professional boxers. Few magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have looked at large cohorts of boxers. The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence and extent of a CSP among professional boxers and to compare these with a control group. METHODS: MRI studies of 164 male boxers scanned for annual British boxing board license renewal were reviewed and compared with 43 control patients. CSP prevalence, size, and extent were recorded. Extent was classified as type 1, anterior to the fornix; type 2, extending up to the fornix; and type 3, extending into the cavum vergae. Parenchymal abnormalities were documented, and the Evan's ratio was used as an indication of brain atrophy. RESULTS: A CSP was present in 40% of controls and 49% of boxers. There was a trend to a higher CSP prevalence in boxers (P = .099). No control patient had type 2 or 3 extension (P < .0009), as opposed to 30% and 16% prevalence in boxers. Three boxers increased their extent over serial imaging. No difference in CSP size was established between the 2 groups (P = .43), but there was an association between progressive scans and increased CSP size over time in boxers, independent of age (P = .05). Eight boxers demonstrated a CSP on a subsequent scan not seen on an earlier scan. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of a CSP is high among both control patients and boxers. There is a trend to a larger CSP with increasing number of scans without evidence of atrophy and independent of age. Boxers also have a greater posterior extent than controls. The findings may be explained by sudden increases in intracranial pressure that forced cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) through small defects in the septal leaflets, which result in an increase in size and or extent of a CSP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations37
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicFetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207