The Role of MRI and Nerve Root Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Neurosarcoidosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Neurological involvement occurs in 5-15% of patients with sarcoidosis and isolated "neurosarcoidosis" occurs in less than 1% of all cases. Classical clinical presentations have been described, such as bilateral facial palsy, but often the disease presents insidiously with varied signs and symptoms. We present a patient who required biopsy of a lumbar nerve root for diagnosis of chronic, progressive neurosarcoidosis and review the literature with an emphasis on diagnosis. METHODS: We have reviewed a patient who presented with signs and symptoms related to infiltration of her meninges and nerve roots by sarcoidosis. All pertinent history and physical information was taken from interviews with the patient and review of her chart. Laboratory, radiographic, and pathological investigations are presented. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A high index of suspicion is required for the diagnosis of neurosarcoidosis. Gadolinium-enhanced MRI is useful but the findings are often nonspecific, and there should be a low threshold for biopsy whenever the diagnosis is considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".