MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correlation of Postmortem 9.4 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Immunohistopathology of the Human Thoracic Spinal Cord 7 Months after Traumatic Cervical Spine Injury

2006· article· en· W2047229325 on OpenAlexaff
Félix Scholtes, Peter Adriaensens, L. Storme, Armin Buss, Byron A. Kakulas, J. Gelan, Emile A. M. Beuls, Jean Schoenen, Gary A. Brook, Didier Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cordMagnetic resonance imagingLesionCordSpinal cord injuryWallerian degenerationRadiologyWhite matterPathologyAnatomySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To correlate high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with immunohistopathology in the injured human spinal cord. METHODS: Postmortem MRI scans at a field strength of 9.4 T, as well as standard histology and immunohistochemistry, were performed on an excised specimen of human high thoracic spinal cord, obtained 7 months after the initial trauma, several segments below a severe spinal cord lesion (C5). RESULTS: A precise correlation is described between MRI and immunohistochemistry of the long white matter tracts undergoing Wallerian degeneration and of an extension of the cervical lesion into the high thoracic cord. CONCLUSION: MRI, the only imaging technique that currently provides useful information on the spinal cord parenchyma after trauma, is rapidly evolving. High-field scanners of up to 9.4 T are being clinically tested. The present postmortem investigation of an isolated spinal cord specimen demonstrates the precise correlation that can be achieved between imaging and pathology. In future investigations, this type of technique can lead to a more precise description of spinal cord injuries and their consequences in remote tissue. Translation into the clinical setting will improve diagnosis and follow-up of spinal cord injured 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207