Detection of Xanthochromia in Cerebrospinal Fluid by Spectrophotometric Scan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to identify subarachnoid hemorrhages (SAH) in patients when present. One of the tools is cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, which includes the red blood cell (RBC) count, visual inspection, and/ or spectrophotometric scanning for xanthochromia. The use of CSF spectrophotometry, although recommended for xanthochromia, is still not routinely used. The goal of the study is to evaluate the usefulness of CSF spectrophotometry for xanthochromia to support the diagnoses of intracranial bleeds, particularly SAH. CSF spectrophotometric scanning was performed and interpreted according to the revised national guidelines published by UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme Joint Working Group in 2008. The data of CSF analyses from 2011 to 2013 was extracted from our laboratory information system. We compared the CSF spectrophotometric results with paired results from visual inspection and RBC count. We examined 788 paired spectrophotometric scans, visual inspection, and RBC count results. Based on spectrophotometric scans, 94% (742/788) did not support SAH (no xanthochromia detected or xanthochromia detected due to either an increased serum bilirubin or an increased CSF protein), 2.5% (20/788) supported SAH (xanthochromia detected), and 3.3% (26/788) were equivocal (high-level oxyhemoglobin impairing the ability to detect bilirubin). Of the 20 samples with xanthochromia, visual inspection correctly identified 10 (50%) and a positive RBC count (RBC >50 × 106/L) correctly identified 18 (90%). Of the 742 samples without xanthochromia, visual inspection falsely identified 26 (3.5%), and RBC counts falsely identified 261 (35%) as positive. Of the 26 equivocal samples, visual inspection identified 1 (4%) and RBC counts identified 16 (62%) as positive. In conclusion, CSF spectrophotometry is useful in identifying intracranial bleeds and neither CSF visual inspection nor RBC count is reliable. This study further supports CSF spectrophotometry should be the routine method for xanthochromia detection to aid in the diagnosis of SAH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".