MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328008013 · doi:10.1097/rmr.0000000000000022

MRI in Brain and Spinal Infection

2014· editorial· en· W2328008013 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.

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

VenueTopics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2014
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfectious Diseases and Tuberculosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVentriculitisNeurocysticercosisMedicineBrain abscessMeningitisMagnetic resonance imagingIntensive care medicineDifferential diagnosisPediatricsAbscessRadiologyPathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A few months ago, I was helping my daughter, a senior in high school, with her history thesis paper. In it, she argued that the discovery and use of antibiotics were the true heroes during World War II, having saved millions of lives to this day. In a similar manner, novel imaging techniques used today are changing the way that we confront and approach the diagnosis of infectious diseases in the brain and spine. Currently, most of the brain and spinal infections are diagnosed with the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). With this technology, it is relatively easy to demonstrate a brain abscess using diffusion-weighted imaging or to demonstrate abnormal meningeal enhancement suggestive of meningitis. However, due to multiple infectious pathogens such as parasites, bacteria, fungus, viral diseases, and prion infections, the differential diagnosis is broad. Because of this, the necessity to obtain an early diagnosis is crucial, because symptoms can appear suddenly and progress into brain damage, paralysis, or death in some cases. The goal of this issue is to cover all of these entities, showing the most important topics in MRI. To accomplish this, I have had the good fortune to work with an excellent group of neuroradiologists from Latin America, India, Canada, and the United States. Because this is an extensive topic, we have decided to present it in 2 issues; the first 4 articles will cover pediatric intracranial infections, central nervous system tuberculosis, neurocysticercosis, and fungal infections of the brain. The following 4 articles will cover meningitis and ventriculitis, MRI of the brain in the patient with HIV, brain MRI in viral diseases and prion diseases, and finally, MRI of spinal infections. I hope that these issues will be informative and helpful, providing current and updated information for the diagnosis of brain and spinal infections using MRI. I would like to thank my friend, Scott W. Atlas, for the great privilege and the invitation to host these 2 issues related to the important topics of “MRI in Brain and Spinal Infection.” At the same time, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the superb group of authors for their effort and time preparing all the manuscripts and material for these 2 issues. I want to thank Julie Chase, Editorial Coordinator from Wolters Kluwer Health Medical Research, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Ovid Technologies, for her guidance and assistance. I also wish to thank some close collaborators at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston—David Hackney, Gul Moonis, Rafeeque Bhadelia, Douglas Teich, Jonathan Kleefield, Nagamani Peri, and Alice Fisher—for all their guidance and for sharing their expertise with me. Finally, I want to say thanks to my lovely wife, Irina, and my wonderful kids for all their support.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.272 · 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