Raised intracranial pressure and retinal haemorrhages in childhood encephalopathies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore the relationship between raised intracranial pressure (RICP) and retinal haemorrhages in traumatic and non-traumatic childhood encephalopathies. METHOD: A prospective study of 112 children (35 females and 77 males, age range 0.01mo-17y 8.3mo; mean 5y 8.6mo, median 4y 5.6mo) included 57 accidental traumatic brain injuries (ATBIs), 21 inflicted traumatic brain injuries (ITBIs), and 34 non-traumatic encephalopathy cases. Measurements included intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebral perfusion pressure, pressure-time index of ICP, and number, zone, and layer of retinal haemorrhages on retinal imaging. RESULTS: Group I had measured elevated ICP (n=42), Group II had clinical and/or radiological signs of RICP (n=21), and Group III had normal ICP (n=49). In the combined Groups I and II, 38% had retinal haemorrhages. Multiple logistic regression confirmed that the presence of retinal haemorrhages was significantly related to the presence of RICP independent of age and aetiology; however, the occurrence and overall numbers were not significantly related to the specific ICP level. The numbers of intraretinal (nerve-fibre layer and dot blot) retinal haemorrhages were significantly greater in those with RICP. The ITBI population was significantly different from the other combined aetiological categories. INTERPRETATION: The study results indicate a complex RICP/retinal haemorrhage relationship. There was no evidence of existing retinal haemorrhages being exacerbated or new retinal haemorrhages developing during periods of confirmed RICP.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".