MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096626213 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100009719

Acquired Monocular Nystagmus as the Initial Presenting Sign of a Chiasmal Glioma

2010· article· en· W2096626213 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Francois D. Jacob, Vijay Ramaswamy, Helly Goez

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNystagmusNeurological examinationOptic chiasmAudiologyOphthalmologyOptic nerveSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 15-month-old male presented with a one-day history of acute onset, continuous oscillating movement of his right eye. He had received his one-year immunizations four days prior and had a four-day history of a febrile viral respiratory tract infection. Pregnancy was unremarkable. He had severe iron deficiency anemia (MCV 66, Hb 65) and was developmentally delayed, as he was unable to stand independently and was non-verbal. His head circumference was 49 cm (95th percentile) and his weight was at the 25th percentile. On physical examination, continuous horizontal large amplitude pendular nystagmus of the right eye at a frequency of 3-4 Hz was observed. No nystagmus was observed in the left eye, even on funduscopic examination. The child could fixate targets in all four quadrants with both eyes independently, and could fixate and track small objects with both eyes independently suggesting no significant visual field defect or visual loss. Dilated funduscopic examination was normal, extra ocular movements were full, pupils were equal and reactive and there was no relative afferent pupillary defect. The remainder of the neurological examination was normal. There was no head bobbing or anomalous head position and no stigmata of neurofibromatosis type 1. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain (Figure) demonstrated a 2 cm x 1.6 cm x 1.2 cm suprasellar enhancing mass involving the optic chiasm, hypothalamus, mamillary bodies and superior pituitary stalk. There was no extension into the pituitary fossa or the optic nerves and no ventricular enlargement. A biopsy of the mass was obtained and revealed histology consistent with a low-grade pilocystic astrocytoma (World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1), consistent with a diagnosis of chiasmal glioma.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.311
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207