MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605569533 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2015.377

Shaken Baby Syndrome – Unravelled

2015· article· fr· W2605569533 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Roland Auer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContent (measure theory)Action (physics)MedicinePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histopathology revealed an increased cell density of oligodendrocytes (3350.5 cells/mm 2 , compared to 1683.6 cells/mm 2 in adjacent normal-appearing white matter, p < 0.001).Myelination (luxol fast blue staining) was normal.Supernumerary cells were negative for IDH1R132H by immunohistochemistry, IDH1/ 2 wildtype by Sequenom, and negative for Ki-67, synaptophysin, and BRAF V600E.The overlying cortex was completely normal, with no gliosis, balloon cell, neuronal dysmorophology or calcification.The original neuropathologic diagnosis was oligodendroglial hamartoma, although a more descriptive diagnosis of focal oligodendroglial hyperplasia is preferred.The patient continues to have 1-2 nocturnal partial (focal with dyscognitive features) seizures per month, but has had no convulsive seizure since her surgery (4.5 year follow-up).Oligodendroglial hyperplasia is a poorly characterized subtype of microdysgenesis, and a rare cause of medically refractory epilepsy.Histologically, it is important that it is differentiated from oligodendroglioma.Because of the paucity of published cases, the clinical impact of surgical resection of oligodendroglial hyperplasia found within the seizure onset zone is uncertain.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicChild Abuse and Related TraumaFrench-language works237,207