MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790662314 · doi:10.1111/jon.12503

Clinical and Neuroimaging Findings in Thalamic Territory Infarctions: A Review

2018· review· en· W2790662314 on OpenAlexaff
Yogesh Kumar, Nishant Gupta, Ahmed Abdelbaki, Harpreet Sahwney, Anil Kumar, Manisha Mangla, Rajiv Mangla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroimaging · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsGreat Plains College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThalamusMedicineDiencephalonNeuroscienceNeuroimagingMagnetic resonance imagingInfarctionAnatomyCentral nervous systemRadiologyCardiologyMyocardial infarctionPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thalamus is a part of the diencephalon, containing numerous connections between the forebrain and subcortical structures. It serves an important function as a relay center between the cerebral cortex and the subcortical regions, particularly with sensory information. The thalamus also plays a major role in regulating arousal and the levels of awareness. Distinct vascular distribution of the thalamus give rises to different syndromic presentation of thalamic nuclei infarcts. The clinical records and available imaging studies of patients with confirmed thalamic territory infarcts on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the University Hospital of Rochester were reviewed and analyzed. This analysis was then used to provide an effective summary of thalamic vascular anatomy, the clinical symptoms, and syndromes associated with strokes in the affected territories. Specifically, we review the syndromes associated with classic vascular territories, including the anterior, paramedian, inferolateral, and posterior thalamic nuclei, that are supplied by the polar (tuberothalamic), paramedian, inferolateral (thalamogeniculate), and posterior choroidal arteries, respectively. In addition, we will also review the variant thalamic territories and associated infarction syndromes of the anteromedian, central, and posterolateral territories. This review article is aimed to better the clinical and radiologic understanding as well as the diagnosis of classic and variant thalamic territory infarcts. This article will also briefly touch on the recovery of function after thalamic infarcts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations56
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroimagingSame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207