MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Looking out for the blind spot

2015· article· en· W2224585193 on OpenAlex
Viswas Dayal, Vivien Teh, David McAuley, Stephen Reddel, Richard Roxburgh

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical Neurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlind spotPsychologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 49-year-old woman presented in July 2014 with a 1-week history of confusion, particularly with memory and word-finding difficulties. She also gave a 3-month history of reduced hearing, initially acutely in the right ear, and a 2-day history of vertigo and vomiting. The vertigo resolved but over the next month she noticed hearing loss affecting the left side as well. Her husband reported that she had had an episode of disorientation and confusion 2 months earlier; this had only lasted a day but her cognition had been completely normal since. She had no vascular risk factors, past medical history or history of using any recreational drug. On examination, she was afebrile and normotensive but was disorientated to day and date. Visual acuity and fundoscopy were normal. Eye movements were normal, as were the other cranial nerves, apart from bilateral hearing loss. The head impulse test was negative. There was mild impairment of rapid alternating movements in the right arm and difficulty with tandem gait. The Montreal cognitive assessment test gave a score of 18/30. A delirium screen with blood tests, including a full blood count, electrolytes, liver function tests, C reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, was normal. A chest radiograph, urine and blood cultures were negative. A CT scan of head was normal but an MRI scan of brain was floridly abnormal (figure 1). Figure 1 MRI scan of brain (July). Images showing axial T2 (A and B); sagittal fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (C); coronal T2 (D); diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (E); sagittal postcontrast T1 (F). ### Question 1 What are your differential diagnoses and what further investigations would you request? The MRI scan of brain shows multiple areas of high T2 and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal within the cerebrum, corpus callosum, cerebellum and brainstem. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) was our primary differential diagnosis. There …

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.263 · 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