MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pure midbrain infarction

2005· article· en· W2145038571 on OpenAlexaff
Jong Seung Kim, Jeeyeon Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMidbrainPathophysiologyMedicineInfarctionCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical features, MRI findings, and the pathogenesis of the pure midbrain infarction. METHODS: Forty patients with infarcts limited to the midbrain were studied. MRI and angiography (mostly MR angiography) were performed in all patients. RESULTS: Clinical manifestations included gait ataxia in 27 (68%) patients, dysarthria in 22 (55%), limb ataxia in 20 (50%), sensory symptoms in 17 (43%), third nerve palsy in 14 (35%), definitive limb weakness (< or =IV/V) in nine (23%), and internuclear ophthalmoplegia in five (13%). According to MRI findings, the lesions were categorized into four groups. The anteromedial group (n = 18) was characterized by oculomotor disturbances (89%), ataxia (89%, bilateral in 17%), and sensory changes (39%) usually restricted to the perioral and hand areas. Lesions restricted to the subcortical area (n = 10) were usually related to small vessel disease (SVD) (78%), whereas those involving the medial surface (n = 8) were caused by large vessel disease (LVD) (78%). The anterolateral group (n = 11) was characterized by ataxia (70%) and definitive hemiparesis (30%) usually caused by LVD (82%). The combined group (n = 6) had frequent oculomotor disturbances (83%), definitive hemiparesis (67%), and ataxia (50%) and was usually associated with LVD (67%). The lateral group (n = 2) was characterized by prominent sensory symptoms. The prognosis was generally good except for one patient with a bilateral lesion. CONCLUSION: Clinical-radiologic correlation study yields four distinct subgroups: anteromedial, anterolateral, combined, and lateral. Large vessel disease and small vessel disease are usual pathogenic mechanisms, whereas cardiogenic embolism is rare.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · 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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations160
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207