Quantifying response to intracranial pressure normalization in idiopathic intracranial hypertension via dynamic neuroimaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is characterized by elevated intracranial pressure without a clear cause. PURPOSE: To investigate dynamic imaging findings in IIH and their relation to mechanisms underlying intracranial pressure normalization. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: Eighteen IIH patients and 30 healthy controls. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: -weighted, venography, fluid attenuation inversion recovery, and apparent diffusion coefficients were acquired on 1.5T scanner. ASSESSMENT: The dural sinus was measured before and after lumbar puncture (LP). The degree of sinus occlusion was evaluated, based on 95% confidence intervals of controls. We studied a number of neuroimaging biomarkers associated with IIH (sinus occlusion; optic nerve; distribution of cerebrospinal fluid into the subarachnoid space, sulci and lateral ventricles (LVs); Meckel's caves; arachnoid granulation; pituitary and choroid plexus), before and after LP, using a set of specially developed quantification techniques. STATISTICAL TESTS: Relationships among various biomarkers were investigated (Pearson correlation coefficient) and linked to long-term disease outcomes (logistic regression). The t-test and the Wilcoxon rank test were used to compare between controls and before and after LP data. RESULTS: As a result of LP, the following were found to be in good accordance with the opening pressure: relative compression of cerebrospinal fluid (R = -0.857, P < 0.001) and brain volumes (R = -0.576, P = 0.012), LV expansion (R = 0.772, P < 0.001) and venous volume (R = 0.696, P = 0.001), enlargement of the pituitary (R = 0.640, P = 0.023), and shrinkage of subarachnoid space (R = -0.887, P < 0.001). The only parameter that had an impact on long-term prognosis was cross-sectional size of supplemental drainage veins after LP (sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 20%, and area under the curve of 0.845, P < 0.001). DATA CONCLUSION: We present an approach for quantitative characterization of the intracranial venous system and its implementation as a diagnostic assistance tool. We conclude that formation of supplementary drainage veins might serve as a long-lasting compensatory mechanism. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:913-927.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".