MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335080416 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000002421

Clinical Reasoning: A 71-year-old man with rapidly progressive dementia

2016· article· en· W2335080416 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicki Niemann, Navid Jalali, Emilie Rouah

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaAudiologyNeurological examinationPsychologyMedical historyMedicineCognitionMental status examinationDepression (economics)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatrySurgeryInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 71-year-old right-handed man presented to the emergency room of our institution with the chief complaint of cognitive impairment of recent onset. His medical history was notable for treated hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depression. He noted a 3-week history of short-term memory impairment (forgetting where he parked his car, misplacing items, forgetting conversations), behavioral changes (short-tempered, apathetic, easily disoriented in unfamiliar settings), generalized fatigue, weight loss, and visual impairment (possible right homonymous hemianopsia), the last of which resolved prior to presentation. He was otherwise able to carry out his basic activities of daily living and continued to drive a car, albeit with some difficulty. Physical examination was notable for 12/30 points on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, losing points mainly for impaired visuospatial-executive function, attention, and delayed recall. He was only mildly disoriented and could not name the hospital or the day of the week. His affect was flat and he appeared apathetic but was otherwise polite and had good insight into his current cognitive problems. Cranial nerve, motor, sensory, and cerebellar examination results were normal. Initial cell blood count, basic metabolic panel, liver function panel, thyroid studies, markers of inflammation, vitamin B12, folate, and urine analysis were all normal.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207