In Vivo Experimental Intracranial Aneurysm Models: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal models are necessary to develop and test innovations in aneurysm therapy before clinical introduction. This review aims at identifying the most likely candidates for standardizing preclinical testing of aneurysm devices. We systematically searched electronic databases for publications on animal aneurysm models from 1961-2008 to assess the methodologic quality of the studies and collect data on the patency and angiographic and pathologic outcomes of treatments. There has been a steady increase in the annual number of publications with time. Species that were most frequently used were dogs, rabbits, and rodents, followed by swine. Most publications are single-laboratory studies with variables and poorly validated outcome measures, a small number of subjects, and limited standardization of techniques. The most appropriate models to test for recurrences after endovascular occlusion were the surgical bifurcation model in dogs, and the elastase-induced aneurysm model in rabbits. A standardized multicenter study is needed to improve the preclinical evaluation of endovascular devices in aneurysm therapy.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".