MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750589697 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2017.223

The Uniform Cortex Sign: A Diagnostic Sign of Diffuse Cortical Injury on MR Imaging of the Brain at 1.5 T

2017· article· en· W2750589697 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrew Leung, Apurva Patel, Basem Bahakeem, David M. Pelz, Donald Lee, Manas Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological and metabolic disorders
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSign (mathematics)Cortex (anatomy)Cerebral cortexMedicineNeuroscienceNuclear magnetic resonancePsychologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To introduce the "uniform cortex sign" (UCS) and evaluate its performance as a diagnostic test for the presence of diffuse cortical injury (DCI). METHODS: The study was approved by our institutional review board. Three experienced neuroradiologists were given a tutorial on the UCS. They were subsequently presented with 14 cases (7 control patients and 7 DCI patients with the UCS) in random order and asked to determine whether the UCS was present. Each case consisted of selected DWI, T2-weighted, and FLAIR images from unenhanced 1.5T MRI examinations. A consensus result for each case was determined by unanimity or majority rule. RESULTS: All control patients were correctly identified as normal by all neuroradiologists (7/7). The UCS was correctly identified in 86% of DCI patients (6/7). UCS interrater agreement was high (multirater κ=0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This small study shows that the UCS can identify DCI, especially in patients with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. The UCS can be subtle, hence the reader must be vigilant for this finding. The accuracy of the UCS may depend on the extent of cortical injury and time between injury and MRI. Also, a UCS may be reversible, as in our case of viral meningoencephalitis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.020
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.255 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicNeurological and metabolic disordersFrench-language works237,207