320-Row Multidetector Computed Tomographic Angiogram in the Evaluation of Cerebral Vasospasm After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid 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
OBJECTIVE: To objectively assess the accuracy of 320-row multidetector computed tomographic (CT) angiography to diagnose cerebral vasospasm after a subarachnoid hemorrhage using a new quantitative method. METHODS: Fifty-four arterial segments were measured in 8 patients who had subarachnoid hemorrhage and underwent digital subtraction angiography within 24 hours after CT angiography for clinical suspicion of cerebral vasospasm. RESULTS: A correlation between arterial diameters measurements made on CT angiography and digital subtraction angiography was observed. The degree of vasospasm tended to be overestimated in the anterior circulation, with arterial diameters that were between 0.05 and 0.72 mm smaller than those on digital subtraction angiography. CONCLUSIONS: A quantitative approach can be used to objectively evaluate the ability of multidetector CT angiography to assess arterial diameter in patients with clinical symptoms of postsubarachnoid hemorrhage cerebral vasospasm. This pilot study also suggests that CT angiography may overestimate the degree of cerebral vasospasm in the anterior circulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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