MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893333658 · doi:10.1155/2018/2374179

An Evaluation of Rapidly Progressive Dementia Culminating in a Diagnosis of Creutzfeldt–Jakob Disease

2018· article· en· W2893333658 on OpenAlexaff
Parmvir Parmar, Curtis Cooper, Daniel Kobewka

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Infectious Diseases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPrion Diseases and Protein Misfolding
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineDifferential diagnosisPediatricsAutoimmune encephalitisAutopsyDiseaseMyoclonusAtaxiaAphasiaCognitive declineEncephalitisPathologyPsychiatryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapidly progressive dementia is a curious and elusive clinical description of a pattern of cognitive deficits that progresses faster than typical dementia syndromes. The differential diagnosis and clinical workup for rapidly progressive dementia are quite extensive and involve searching for infectious, inflammatory, autoimmune, neoplastic, metabolic, and neurodegenerative causes. We present the case of a previously highly functional 76-year-old individual who presented with a 6-month history of rapidly progressive dementia. His most prominent symptoms were cognitive impairment, aphasia, visual hallucinations, and ataxia. Following an extensive battery of tests in hospital, the differential diagnosis remained probable CJD versus autoimmune encephalitis. He clinically deteriorated and progressed to akinetic mutism and myoclonus. He passed away 8 weeks after his initial presentation to hospital, and an autopsy confirmed a diagnosis of sporadic CJD. We use this illustrative case as a framework to discuss the clinical and diagnostic considerations in the workup for rapidly progressive dementia. We also discuss CJD and autoimmune encephalitis, the two main diagnostic possibilities in our patient, in more detail.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in Infectious DiseasesSame topicPrion Diseases and Protein MisfoldingFrench-language works237,207