MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150487086 · doi:10.1002/ana.22001

Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency and multiple sclerosis

2010· article· en· W2150487086 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Khan, Massimo Filippi, Mark S. Freedman, Frederik Barkhof, Paula Dore‐Duffy, Hans Lassmann, Bruce D. Trapp, Amit Bar‐Or, Imad Zak, Marilyn J. Siegel, Robert P. Lisak

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityOttawa HospitalMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisMedicineIntensive care medicineAngioplastyClinical PracticeRadiologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A chronic state of impaired venous drainage from the central nervous system, termed chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI), is claimed to be a pathologic phenomenon exclusively seen in multiple sclerosis (MS). This has invigorated the causal debate of MS and generated immense interest in the patient and scientific communities. A potential shift in the treatment paradigm of MS involving endovascular balloon angioplasty or venous stent placement has been proposed as well as conducted in small patient series. In some cases, it may have resulted in serious injury. In this Point of View, we discuss the recent investigations that led to the description of CCSVI as well as the conceptual and technical shortcomings that challenge the potential relationship of this phenomenon to MS. The need for conducting carefully designed and rigorously controlled studies to investigate CCVSI has been recognized by the scientific bodies engaged in MS research. Several scientific endeavors examining the presence of CCSVI in MS are being undertaken. At present, invasive and potentially dangerous endovascular procedures as therapy for patients with MS should be discouraged until such studies have been completed, analyzed, and debated in the scientific arena.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations140
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207