MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334186081 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100008556

Extracranial Carotid and Vertebral Artery Dissection: A Review

2008· review· en· W2334186081 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVertebral arteryVertebral artery dissectionDissection (medical)RadiologyCarotid arteriesSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dissection of the extracranial carotid and vertebral arteries is increasingly recognized as a cause of transient ischemic attacks and stroke. The annual incidence of spontaneous carotid artery dissection is 2.5 to 3 per 100,000, while the annual incidence of spontaneous vertebral artery dissection is 1 to 1.5 per 100,000. Traumatic dissection occurs in approximately 1% of all patients with blunt injury mechanisms, and is frequently initially unrecognized. Overall, dissections are estimated to account for only 2% of all ischemic strokes, but they are an important factor in the young, and account for approximately 20% of strokes in patients less than 45 years of age. Arterial dissection can cause ischemic stroke either by thromboemboli forming at the site of injury or as a result of hemodynamic insufficiency due to severe stenosis or occlusion. Available evidence strongly favors embolism as the most common cause. Both anticoagulation and antiplatelet agents have been advocated as treatment methods, but there is limited evidence on which to base these recommendations. A Cochrane review on the topic of antithrombotic drugs for carotid dissection did not identify any randomized trials, and did not find that anticoagulants were superior to antiplatelet agents for the primary outcomes of death and disability. Healing of arterial dissections occurs within three to six months, with resolution of stenosis seen in 90%, and recanalization of occlusions in as many as 50%. Dissecting aneurysms resolve on follow-up imaging in 5-40%,decrease in size in 15-30%, and remain unchanged in 50-65%. Resolution is more common in vertebral dissections than in carotid dissections. Aneurysm enlargement occurs rarely. The uncommon patient presenting with acute hemodynamic insufficiency should be managed with measures to increase cerebral blood flow, and in this setting emergency stent placement to restore cerebral perfusion may be considered, provided that irreversible infarction has not already occurred.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.253 · 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