Neuropsychological Outcome after Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction is a common complaint associated with obstructive hydrocephalus. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) on the neuropsychological outcome in patients presenting with cognitive decline and obstructive hydrocephalus. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent ETV at the University of Calgary and had both pre and post operative neuropsychological testing, was completed. Presenting clinical features, etiology of hydrocephalus and ventricle size utilizing frontal occipital horn ratio was obtained. Outcomes and complications of the ETV were recorded. Detailed measures of intelligence, attention and concentration, executive function, visual and verbal memory, language functions and fine motor skills were completed. Post treatment change was determined utilizing Reliable Change Index. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were identified. Etiology of the hydrocephalus was aqueductal stenosis in 8 and tectal glioma in 4. The majority of patients (11 of 13, 85%) demonstrated cognitive dysfunction at the borderline (≤1 SD) or impairment level (≤1.5 SDs) in at least one domain. Nine patients (69%) showed reliable improvement in at least one cognitive domain. The greatest improvement was seen with visual memory (42%). One quarter to one third of patients demonstrated improvement on tests of intelligence quotient, verbal memory, attention and concentration, and executive function. Two patients declined in executive functioning. Ventricle size improved in eight patients. CONCLUSIONS: ETV is a safe effective procedure, capable of producing reliable improvements in cognitive dysfunction with hydrocephalus. Patients with cognitive complaints alone may benefit from ETV.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".