MRI Markers of Small Vessel Disease in Lobar and Deep Hemispheric Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MRI evidence of small vessel disease is common in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We hypothesized that ICH caused by cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) or hypertensive vasculopathy would have different distributions of MRI T2 white matter hyperintensity (WMH) and microbleeds. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 133 consecutive patients with primary supratentorial ICH and adequate MRI sequences. CAA was diagnosed using the Boston criteria. WMH segmentation was performed using a validated semiautomated method. WMH and microbleeds were compared according to site of symptomatic hematoma origin (lobar versus deep) or by pattern of hemorrhages, including both hematomas and microbleeds, on MRI gradient recalled echo sequence (grouped as lobar only-probable CAA, lobar only-possible CAA, deep hemispheric only, or mixed lobar and deep hemorrhages). RESULTS: Patients with lobar and deep hemispheric hematoma had similar median normalized WMH volumes (19.5 cm versus 19.9 cm(3), P=0.74) and prevalence of >or=1 microbleed (54% versus 52%, P=0.99). The supratentorial WMH distribution was similar according to hemorrhage location category; however, the prevalence of brain stem T2 hyperintensity was lower in lobar hematoma versus deep hematoma (54% versus 70%, P=0.004). Mixed ICH was common (23%). Patients with mixed ICH had large normalized WMH volumes and a posterior distribution of cortical hemorrhages similar to that seen in CAA. CONCLUSIONS: WMH distribution is largely similar between CAA-related and non-CAA-related ICH. Mixed lobar and deep hemorrhages are seen on MRI gradient recalled echo sequence in up to one fourth of patients; in these patients, both hypertension and CAA may be contributing to the burden of WMH.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".