MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085019897 · doi:10.3171/jns.2003.98.3.0631

Theodore Brown Rasmussen (1910–2002): epilepsy surgeon, scientist, and teacher

2003· article· en· W2085019897 on OpenAlexaffabout
William Feindel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of neurosurgery · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineScrutinyEpilepsy surgeryLanguage functionNeurosurgeryGeneral surgeryPsychoanalysisPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theodore Brown Rasmussen succeeded Wilder Penfield as director of the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) and held this post from 1960 to 1972. During his career, Rasmussen probably performed more operations for epilepsy than any other surgeon of his time; he became the foremost authority in this field. His meticulous follow-up analyses of the MNI seizure series provided substantial evidence for the success of surgery in the treatment of focal epilepsy. In addition, he made significant contributions to surgery of the pituitary gland for control of cancer, treatment of cerebral and spinal tumors, application of the intracarotid Amytal test for lateralization of speech and memory function, and characterization and treatment of epilepsy accompanied by chronic encephalitis, now referred to as Rasmussen syndrome. His painstaking attention to surgical details as well as his insistence on close monitoring of patient care and critical scrutiny of clinical results marked him as an outstanding teacher and role model for young neurosurgeons and neuroscientists.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of neurosurgerySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207