MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910846844 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000006907

Intracranial arteriopathies and RCVS

2019· letter· en· W2910846844 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Arrigan, José Biller

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological Complications and Syndromes
Canadian institutionsRichmond HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndromeMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)Intensive care medicinePediatricsVasoconstrictionRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the literature offers a number of clinical and radiologic approaches to the investigation of reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS), clinicians faced with new presentations of intracranial arteriopathy have no validated approach to assist them.1,2 The diagnostic criteria in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3), provides a predominantly descriptive classification of RCVS categorizing definite and probable cases3 that provides little guidance in the setting of a new acute presentation. Distinguishing between RCVS and non-RCVS arteriopathies has important management implications particularly because steroids, often used in the management of non-RCVS arteriopathies, worsen the course and outcome of RCVS.4

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicNeurological Complications and SyndromesFrench-language works237,207