MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2797856866 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3397w

Dissecting Vertebral Artery Aneurysm Presenting Regrowth After Stent-Assisted Coil Embolization in Acute Stage

2018· article· en· W2797856866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Takamichi Hijikata, Eiichi Baba, Kazutaka Shirokane, Atsushi Tsuchiya, Motohiro Nomura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Organization of Occupational Health and Safety
KeywordsMedicinePosterior inferior cerebellar arteryAneurysmVertebral arteryEmbolizationSubarachnoid hemorrhagePica (typography)StentRadiologyAngiographyVertebral artery dissectionDissection (medical)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a case of dissecting vertebral artery aneurysm (DVAA) in a dominant vertebral artery (VA) or posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA)-involving lesion, stent-assisted coil embolization (SACE) is an effective technique to preserve blood flow of the VA. A 41-year-old man presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Angiography demonstrated DVAA on the left VA just distal to the PICA, and the right VA was thinner than the left. For this case, SACE was performed to preserve the left VA and PICA. On the 10th day, angiography showed recurrence of the dissection. The dissected portion had thickened and extended to both distal and proximal sides involving the PICA origin and proximal portion to the PICA. A second endovascular embolization was performed and the recurrent dissecting aneurysm was embolized including the main VA cavity. In cases of DVAA, there is a possibility of recurrence after SACE, if a dissecting cavity remains unembolized. Therefore, total embolization is necessary under close observation from multiple angles, including the down-the-barrel view.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications→French-language works237,207→