MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128881570 · doi:10.1148/rg.304095188

MR Imaging of Entrapment Neuropathies of the Lower Extremity

2010· article· en· W2128881570 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Donovan, Zehava Sadka Rosenberg, Conrado Furtado Albuquerque Cavalcanti

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiographics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Nerve Disorders
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEntrapment NeuropathyMagnetic resonance neurographyAnkleSuperficial peroneal nerveEntrapmentMagnetic resonance imagingCommon peroneal nerveTibial nerveSural nerveAnatomyRadiologySurgeryCarpal tunnel syndrome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Entrapment neuropathies of the knee, leg, ankle, and foot are often underdiagnosed, as the results of clinical examination and electrophysiologic evaluation are not always reliable. The causes of most entrapment neuropathies in the lower extremity may be divided into two major categories: (a) mechanical causes, which occur at fibrous or fibro-osseous tunnels, and (b) dynamic causes related to nerve injury during specific limb positioning. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, including high-resolution MR neurography, allows detailed evaluation of the course and morphology of peripheral nerves, as well as accurate delineation of surrounding soft-tissue and osseous structures that may contribute to nerve entrapment. Familiarity with the normal MR imaging anatomy of the nerves in the knee, leg, ankle, and foot is essential for accurate assessment of the presence of peripheral entrapment syndromes. Common entrapment neuropathies in the knee, leg, ankle, and foot include those of the common peroneal nerve, deep peroneal nerve, superficial peroneal nerve, tibial nerve and its branches, and sural nerve.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations316
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiographicsSame topicPeripheral Nerve DisordersFrench-language works237,207