MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094376677 · doi:10.1186/1743-8454-4-3

Possible role of the cavernous sinus veins in cerebrospinal fluid absorption

2007· article· en· W2094376677 on OpenAlexafffund
Miles G. Johnston, Dianna Armstrong, Lena Koh

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebrospinal Fluid Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCerebrospinal fluidMedicineEpineuriumAnatomySubarachnoid spaceCisterna magnaPerivascular spaceLymphatic systemSinus (botany)Cavernous sinusPerineuriumPathologyBiologySciatic nerve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this investigation was to enhance our understanding of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) absorption pathways. To achieve this, Microfil (a coloured silastic material) was infused into the subarachnoid space (cisterna magna) of sheep post mortem, and the relevant tissues examined macroscopically and microscopically. The Microfil was taken up by an extensive network of extracranial lymphatic vessels in the olfactory turbinates. In addition however, Microfil also passed consistently through the dura at the base of the brain. Microfil was noted in the spaces surrounding the venous network that comprises the cavernous sinus, in the adventitia of the internal carotid arteries and adjacent to the pituitary gland. Additionally, Microfil was observed within the endoneurial spaces of the trigeminal nerve and in lymphatic vessels emerging from the epineurium of the nerve. These results suggest several unconventional pathways by which CSF may be removed from the subarachnoid space. The movement of CSF to locations external to the cranium via these routes may lead to its absorption into veins and lymphatics outside of the skull. The physiological importance of these pathways requires further investigation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebrospinal Fluid ResearchSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207