MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087166630 · doi:10.1177/0883073811408094

A Prospective Outcome Study of Neonatal Cerebral Sinovenous Thrombosis

2011· article· en· W2087166630 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahendranath Moharir, Manohar Shroff, Ann‐Marie Pontigon, Rand Askalan, Ivanna Yau, Daune MacGregor, Gabrielle deVeber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of HealthHospital for Sick ChildrenStroke Association
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsStroke (engine)Venous thrombosisOdds ratioPediatric strokeComorbidityThrombosisProspective cohort studyInternal medicineIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neonatal cerebral sinovenous thrombosis is a frequent contributor to neonatal mortality and morbidity. Treatment is controversial, and reported clinical outcomes vary widely. Newborns with radiologically confirmed neonatal cerebral sinovenous thrombosis from 1992 to 2009 were prospectively followed in our Children's Stroke Clinic for standardized outcomes, including the Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure. Outcomes were available in 90 of 104 (87%) neonates. Early outcomes included cerebral sinovenous thrombosis-associated death (5) and thrombus propagation (15 [6 associated with new venous infarcts]). Lack of anticoagulation predicted propagation (RR = 13; P = .0007). Complete thrombus recanalization occurred in 90% by 3 months. Late outcomes (median, 2.5 years) were epilepsy (15) and neurological disability (50), which included moderate-severe language (43), sensorimotor (38), and cognitive/behavioral (24) deficits. Overall, 61% had poor outcome (death/any deficit). Concurrent neurological comorbidity at diagnosis (odds ratio = 2.8; P = .029) predicted poor outcome. Clinical trials are urgently needed to establish more effective treatment strategies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations115
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207