MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070237945 · doi:10.4103/2156-7514.135181

Multi-level Split Cord Malformation: Do We Need a New Classification?

2014· article· en· W2070237945 on OpenAlex
Gmaan Alzhrani, Hosam Al-Jehani, Denis Melançon

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Imaging Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)PathologicalSpinal cordPediatricsPathologyObstetrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Split cord malformations (SCMs) are thought to be rare abnormalities representing 3.8-5% of all spinal cord anomalies. The prevalence is estimated to be 1 in 5499 live births (0.02%), with a slight female predominance (1.3:1). Although the estimates of prevalence vary, Type I SCM occurs more frequently than Type II SCM. In this paper, we are reporting the clinical presentation and imaging findings of multi-level SCM in a 27-year-old male. A literature review of the embryological background of SCM and pathological hypothesis for this entity is provided. A systematic review has been conducted to identify multi-level SCM cases reported in the literature, followed by proposing a new classification system to further our understanding and management of SCMs.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.467
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