P.006 Role of repeat antithyroid antibody testing in the diagnosis of Hashimoto’s Encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We present a case of a previously well 71-year-old woman who developed rapidly progressive dementia. She had several prolonged hospital admissions and extensive investigations were performed. Her illness was steroid-responsive with clinical features suggestive of Hashimoto’s Encephalopathy (HE). However, multiple thyroid antibody panels acquired were initially normal, becoming elevated during subsequent relapses that occurred 3 years after initial presentation. The case signifies the importance of repeating antithyroid antibody levels in a patient with a clinical picture suggestive of HE. Methods: Case report. Results: The diagnosis of HE was established because of a compatible clinical picture including a relapsing encephalopathy with motor involvement and steroid responsiveness. In addition, although initial antithyroid antibody testing was negative, subsequent attacks were associated with significant elevations and reverted to normal with resolution of the attacks. Conclusions: In a patient with normal levels of antithyroid antibodies and a clinical presentation suggestive of HE, we recommend repeat antithyroid antibody testing to confirm diagnosis. Further studies are necessary to clarify the pathogenic role of elevated antithyroid antibodies in the mechanism of HE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".