MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158393661 · doi:10.1159/000056016

Future Directions for Therapy of Childhood Hydrocephalus: A View from the Laboratory

2001· review· en· W2158393661 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

VenuePediatric Neurosurgery · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMedical Research CouncilFondation pour la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsHydrocephalusMedicineNeuroscienceMechanism (biology)PathogenesisBrain tissueNeurotrophic factorsAnimal modelBrain damageNervous systemPathologySurgeryAnatomyInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A personal perspective on the study of experimental models of hydrocephalus is offered. Many animal models are available; each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Detailed study of more than one model is needed to clarify the pathogenesis of hydrocephalus-induced brain damage in the immature nervous system. Further information is needed about the mechanism of axonal injury in periventricular tissue, changes in the extracellular compartment, water dynamics within brain tissue, the role of neurotrophic factors in hydrocephalus, and the sites of injury in chronic 'arrested' hydrocephalus. Insight into the multifactorial nature of the brain damage may allow us to develop supplemental pharmacologic therapies, which could protect the brain and promote recovery in the pre- and postshunt period.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.254 · 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