Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cervical arterial dissection is a major cause of stroke in young adults, yet despite standard treatment with anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs, its management remains uncertain. The goal of this study was to assess the natural history of the disorder and to decide on the feasibility of a therapeutic trial. METHODS: Collaborating members of the Canadian Stroke Consortium prospectively enrolled consecutively referred patients with angiographically proven acute vertebral or carotid arterial dissection. Data recorded included clinical and radiological details, recurrence of ischemic cerebral events, and medical or surgical treatment. RESULTS: Of 116 patients, 67 had vertebral and 49 had carotid dissections, with no difference in age or sex. In 68 (59%), trauma occurred at the time of dissection. During the course of a 1-year follow-up, at least 17 patients (15%) had recurrent transient ischemic attacks, stroke, or death, mainly in the weeks immediately after the dissection. In 105 patients with complete follow-up, the event rate in those treated with anticoagulants was 8.3% and in those treated with aspirin was 12.4%, a nonsignificant difference of 4.1%. Using these data, we calculate that for a 2-arm trial (aspirin versus anticoagulants) with 80% power and 5% significance, 913 patients are needed in each group. CONCLUSIONS: From our data indicating an initial relatively high recurrence rate, a multicenter trial of anticoagulants versus aspirin involving a total of 2000 patients is feasible.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it