MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806541938 · doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000000567

Neuroimaging of brain trauma

2018· review· en· W2806541938 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Douglas, Jonathan Muldermans, Max Wintermark

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroimagingMedicineTraumatic brain injuryGlasgow Coma ScaleDiffusion MRIRadiologyConcussionHead traumaMagnetic resonance imagingPoison controlSurgeryInjury preventionPsychiatryEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide an update on advanced neuroimaging techniques in traumatic brain injury (TBI). We will focus this review on recent literature published within the last 18 months and the advanced neuroimaging techniques of perfusion imaging and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). RECENT FINDINGS: In the setting of a moderate or severe acute closed head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale <13), the most appropriate neuroimaging study is a noncontrast computed tomography (CT) scan. In the setting of mild TBI, the indication for neuroimaging can be determined using the New Orleans Criteria or Canadian CT Head Rules or National Emergency X-Ray Utilization Study-II clinical criteria. Two advanced neuroimaging techniques that are currently being researched in TBI include perfusion imaging and DTI. Perfusion CT has a higher sensitivity for detecting cerebral contusions than noncontrast CT examinations. DTI is a sensitive at detecting TBI at the group level (TBI-group versus control group), but there is insufficient evidence to suggest that DTI plays a clinical role for diagnosing mild TBI at the individual patient level. SUMMARY: Future research in advanced neuroimaging techniques including perfusion imaging and DTI may improve the accuracy of the diagnosis and prognosis as well as improve the management of TBI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207