Defining the CT Angiography ‘Spot Sign’ in Primary Intracerebral Hemorrhage
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The computed tomogram angiography (CTA) 'spot sign' describes foci of intralesional enhancement associated with hematoma expansion in primary intracerebral hemorrhage patients. A consistent radiological definition is required for two proposed recombinant Factor VIIa trials planning patient dichotomization according to 'spot sign' presence or absence. We propose radiological criteria for diagnosis of the CTA 'spot sign' and describe different morphological patterns. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of 36 consecutive patients presenting with primary intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) were enrolled in a multicenter collaborative study, and have been included for the present analysis. Three reviewers analyzed the CTA studies in a blinded protocol. Analysis of specific ICH and 'spot sign' features was performed including prevalence, number, size, location, morphology and Hounsfield unit density. RESULTS: Twelve of thirty-six patients (33%) demonstrated a total of 19 enhancing foci consistent with the CTA 'spot sign'. Mean maximal axial 'spot sign' dimension was 3.7 +/- 2.2 mm and mean density was 216 +/- 57.7 HU. No significant differences in age or blood pressure (p = 0.7), glucose (p = 0.9), INR/PTT (p = 0.3 and 0.4) or hematoma location (p = 0.3) were demonstrated between patients with or without the 'spot sign'. Consensus definition and classification criteria for the CTA 'spot sign' are proposed. CONCLUSION: The 'spot sign' is defined as spot-like and/or serpiginous foci of enhancement, within the margin of a parenchymal hematoma without connection to outside vessels. The 'spot sign' is greater than 1.5 mm in maximal dimension and has a Hounsfield unit density at least double that of background hematoma density.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it