MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2487755826 · doi:10.17925/enr.2011.06.03.181

Primary Angiitis of the Central Nervous System - Clinical Approaches, Challenges and Controversies

2011· article· en· W2487755826 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Gioia, Alexandre Y. Poppe, Sylvain Lanthier

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Neurological Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Notre-Dame
FundersUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsMedicineVasculitisHeadachesIntensive care medicineCentral nervous systemMagnetic resonance imagingCerebral vasculitisPathologyDiseaseSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary angiitis of the central nervous system (PACNS) is a rare and life-threatening form of vasculitis confined to the CNS. A timely diagnosis is a real challenge because clinical manifestations of PACNS are diverse and nonspecific. Headaches, cerebrospinal fluid inflammation and abnormal brain magnetic resonance imaging are prevalent. When PACNS is suspected, a thorough investigation is mandatory to rule out several potential simulators and confirm the diagnosis. Treatment of PACNS is also a challenge involving competing forces, which include the threat of serious adverse effects of potent immunosuppressive agents and the risk of neurological deteriorations due to insufficient immunosuppressant therapy. Efforts are ongoing to delineate subtypes requiring different therapeutic approaches and having distinct prognoses. Despite recent progress, PACNS is still fatal in as much as one-sixth of cases. Long-term follow-up is mandatory in patients with PACNS.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.100 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Neurological ReviewSame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207