MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766902338 · doi:10.1089/neu.2017.5357

Predicting Injury Severity and Neurological Recovery after Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Comparison of Cerebrospinal Fluid and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Biomarkers

2017· article· en· W2766902338 on OpenAlexaff
Türker Dalkılıç, Nader Fallah, Vanessa K. Noonan, Sanam Salimi Elizei, Kevin Dong, Lise Bélanger, Leanna Ritchie, Angela Tsang, Étienne Bourassa-Moreau, Manraj K. S. Heran, Scott Paquette, Tamir Ailon, Nicolas Dea, John Street, Charles G. Fisher, Marcel F. Dvorak, Brian K. Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCerebrospinal fluidMagnetic resonance imagingBiomarkerSpinal cordSpinal cord injuryImaging biomarkerPathologyRadiologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomarkers of acute human spinal cord injury (SCI) could provide a more objective measure of spinal cord damage and a better predictor of neurological outcome than current standardized neurological assessments. In SCI, there is growing interest in establishing biomarkers from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Here, we compared the ability of CSF and MRI biomarkers to classify injury severity and predict neurological recovery in a cohort of acute cervical SCI patients. CSF samples and MRI scans from 36 acute cervical SCI patients were examined. From the CSF samples taken 24 h post-injury, the concentrations of inflammatory cytokines (interleukin [IL]-6, IL-8, monocyte chemotactic protein-1), and structural proteins (tau, glial fibrillary acidic protein, and S100β) were measured. From the pre-operative MRI scans, we measured intramedullary lesion length, hematoma length, hematoma extent, CSF effacement, cord expansion, and maximal spinal cord compression. Baseline and 6-month post-injury assessments of American Spine Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade and motor score were conducted. Both MRI measures and CSF biomarker levels were found to correlate with baseline injury grade, and in combination they provided a stronger model for classifying baseline AIS grade than CSF or MRI biomarkers alone. For predicting neurological recovery, the inflammatory CSF biomarkers best predicted AIS grade conversion, whereas structural biomarker levels best predicted motor score improvement. A logistic regression model utilizing CSF biomarkers alone had a 91.2% accuracy at predicting AIS conversion, and was not strengthened by adding MRI features or even knowledge of the baseline AIS grade. In a direct comparison of MRI and CSF biomarkers, the CSF biomarkers discriminate better between different injury severities, and are stronger predictors of neurological recovery in terms of AIS grade and motor score improvement. These findings demonstrate the utility of measuring the acute biological responses to SCI as biomarkers of injury severity and neurological prognosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 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

Citations116
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207