MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150695877 · doi:10.4103/1658-354x.114047

Early brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage: Where are we at present?

2013· article· en· W2150695877 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSaudi Journal of Anaesthesia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubarachnoid hemorrhagePathophysiologyMechanism (biology)VasospasmBleedIschemiaIntensive care medicineIntracranial pressureTherapeutic modalitiesReview articleNeuroscienceAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current era has adopted many new innovations in nearly every aspect of management of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH); however, the neurological outcome has still not changed significantly. These major therapeutic advances mainly addressed the two most important sequels of the SAH-vasospasm and re-bleed. Thus, there is a possibility of some different pathophysiological mechanism that would be responsible for causing poor outcome in these patients. In this article, we have tried to compile the current role of this different yet potentially treatable pathophysiological mechanism in post-SAH patients. The main pathophysiological mechanism for the development of early brain injury (EBI) is the apoptotic pathways. The macro-mechanism includes increased intracranial pressure, disruption of the blood-brain barrier, and finally global ischemia. Most of the treatment strategies are still in the experimental phase. Although the role of EBI following SAH is now well established, the treatment modalities for human patients are yet to be testified.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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