MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021159412 · doi:10.1177/135245850000600205

Diagnostic brain MRI findings in primary progressive multiple sclerosis

2000· article· en· W2021159412 on OpenAlexaff
Marcelo Kremenchutzky, D Lee, George P. Rice, George C. Ebers

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyCentral nervous system diseaseLesionMri scanNuclear medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical course of multiple sclerosis can be classified as relapsing from onset (relapsing-remitting), or progressive from onset (primary progressive - PPMS). These clinical phenotypes have been based on historical and clinical observations. It has been reported that PPMS patients tend to have quantitatively less MRI activity and disease burden. We evaluated the sensitivity and diagnostic value of conventional brain MRI scan in 143 PPMS patients. Brain MRIs were blindly evaluated to determine if they satisfied Paty and/or Fazekas diagnostic criteria. Patients were divided into those with typical, atypical or normal scans. They satisfied brain MRI criteria in 92% cases. Findings included: 131 typical, four atypical, and eight normal scans. All 12 non-typical scans' subjects had spinal onset; spinal MRI scans were positive in four of seven cases. Sex, age of onset, site and number of symptoms involved at onset among those groups were not significantly different but accumulation of disability had a tendency to be slower in these few individuals with normal or atypical head MRI's. Although there may be quantitative differences in lesion activity/burden, MRI scanning in PPMS unexpectedly has diagnostic sensitivity very similar to that seen in RRMS. A normal brain MRI is unusual in PPMS patients.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207