MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2325153632 · doi:10.1017/s031716710000425x

Concurrence of glioma and multiple sclerosis

2005· article· en· W2325153632 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Shah-Naz H. Khan, Joseph Buwembo, Qi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsRegina General HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesionMultiple sclerosisMedicineHeadachesMagnetic resonance imagingFrontal lobeRadiologyNeurological examinationNuclear medicinePathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 29-year-old Caucasian female diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) for seven years, presented with a history of headaches and a single episode of new onset seizures. Her physical examination was unremarkable and she was placed on anti-seizure medications. A computed tomography (CT) scan showed a right frontal brain lesion causing minimal mass effect (Figure 1). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a large nonenhancing space occupying lesion in the right frontal lobe, in addition to numerous smaller lesions which were characteristic of MS plaques (Figures 2 & 3). The large lesion was causing mass effect with right to left midline shift (Figures 2, 3A & B). Given the patient’s history, the appearance and unusually large size of the frontal lesion, it was unclear whether it was a demyelinating MS plaque, or an intra-axial tumour.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→