Radiologic Assessment of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations: What Clinicians Need to Know
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
Brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are abnormal vascular connections within the brain that are presumably congenital in nature. There are several subgroups, the most common being glomerular type brain AVMs, with fistulous type AVMs being less common. A brain AVM may also be a part of more extensive disease (eg, cerebrofacial arteriovenous metameric syndrome). When intracranial pathologic vessels are encountered at cross-sectional imaging, other diagnoses must also be considered, including large developmental venous anomalies, malignant dural arteriovenous fistulas, and moyamoya disease, since these entities are known to have different natural histories and require different treatment options. Several imaging findings in brain AVMs have an impact on decision making with respect to clinical management; the most important are those known to be associated with risk of future hemorrhage, including evidence of previous hemorrhage, intranidal aneurysms, venous stenosis, deep venous drainage, and deep location of the nidus. Other imaging findings that should be included in the radiology report are secondary effects caused by brain AVMs that may lead to nonhemorrhagic neurologic deficits, such as venous congestion, gliosis, hydrocephalus, or arterial steal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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