MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172142073 · doi:10.3171/jns/2008/109/8/0199

A comparison of 3 radiographic scales for the prediction of delayed ischemia and prognosis following subarachnoid hemorrhage

2008· article· en· W2172142073 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

VenueJournal of neurosurgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubarachnoid hemorrhageGlasgow Coma ScaleLogistic regressionVasospasmGlasgow Outcome ScaleInfarctionRetrospective cohort studyStepwise regressionCerebral vasospasmSurgeryInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECT: Delayed cerebral ischemia is a major cause of morbidity and death following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and requires timely intervention for a successful outcome to be achieved. In this study the investigators compared the commonly used Fisher scale with 2 newer radiographic scales for the prediction of vasospasm, delayed infarction, and poor outcome. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study involving 271 consecutive patients with a ruptured cerebral aneurysm. Without knowledge of subsequent events, admission CT scans were each assigned scores by using 3 different grading schemes: the Fisher, modified Fisher, and Claassen scales. For each of the scales, the relationship between an increasing score and the risk of later complications was assessed in univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: With the Fisher scale, the risk of complications was relatively high when the score was 3, but not for other scores. In contrast, using the other scales, there was a more linear relationship between a rising score and the frequency of complications. This was particularly true for the modified Fisher scale, in which each stepwise increase was associated with an escalating risk of vasospasm, delayed infarction, and poor prognosis. Kappa scores measuring interobserver variability among 4 CT readers were also slightly better with the newer scales. CONCLUSIONS: Although the modified Fisher and Claassen scales have yet to be prospectively validated, the authors' findings suggest that the clinical performance of these systems is superior to that of the Fisher scale.

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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.246 · 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