MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343853117 · doi:10.4103/1793-5482.181138

Spontaneous resolution of colloid cyst of the third ventricle: Implications for management

2016· article· en· W2343853117 on OpenAlexaff
Mazda K. Turel, Walter Kucharczyk, Fred Gentili

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Neurosurgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColloid cystMedicineAsymptomaticCystThird ventricleConservative managementHydrocephalusNeuroimagingNatural historyResolution (logic)Radiological weaponSurgeryRadiologySpontaneous remissionPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there is little controversy regarding the treatment of symptomatic colloid cysts, the optimal management of "incidentally" detected and asymptomatic colloid cyst remains unclear. The age of the patient, duration and significance of symptoms related to the cyst, size and radiological characteristics of the cyst and the presence of hydrocephalus are all factors to be considered before considering surgery. While surgery most often provides good results in the majority of patients, complications do occur. Despite growing literature about the natural history of this condition, to date, only three cases of spontaneous resolution of colloid cyst <10 mm have been reported. We report the case of spontaneous resolution of a colloid cyst larger than 10 mm, initially managed with close observation and serial neuroimaging. This case highlights the possible role for a conservative approach even in larger-sized cysts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0090.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of NeurosurgerySame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207