MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739920491 · doi:10.1055/s-0037-1603684

Special Considerations for Primary and Secondary Stroke Prevention in Women

2017· review· en· W2739920491 on OpenAlexaff
Deema Alrasheed, Cheryl Jaigobin

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Neurology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)ThrombophiliaIncidence (geometry)Primary preventionVenous thrombosisMigrainePregnancyLife expectancyPediatricsThrombosisPhysical therapyGynecologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There are gender differences in stroke in several areas. Overall, the incidence of stroke is greater in women because of the increased risk of stroke with increasing age and the longer life expectancy of women. However, gender-specific risk factors for stroke include hormonal changes during pregnancy and exogenous hormonal therapies. Also, cerebral venous thrombosis, thrombophilia, and migraine are more prevalent in women. These gender differences are the subject of this review.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in NeurologySame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207