A case report on late presentation of occult dural lesions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Occult dural injuries are rare and can occur as a result of major or minor head injury. These injuries usually manifest with cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea alone, or with meningitis and cerebral abscess, sometimes many years after the original injury. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of occult dural injury with endocranial complications which occurred in a 34 year old man, with a history of head injury forty-three years ago. The patient presented with a triad of findings; meningitis, CSF rhinorrhoea and pneumocephalus. He was managed conservatively with intravenous antibiotics and observation and made a full recovery. The presence of acute endocranial symptoms and particularly these three findings in a patient with a previous history of head injury, no matter how long it had been should raise suspicion of the presence of an occult dural injury. CONCLUSION: It need to retain a high index of suspicion for occult dural injury in patients who present with endocranial symptoms of unknown origin, especially if there is a previous history of head injury.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".