MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964749322 · doi:10.1002/ana.25563

Standards for Detecting, Interpreting, and Reporting Noncontrast Computed Tomographic Markers of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Expansion

2019· review· en· W2964749322 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsIntracerebral hemorrhageComputed tomographicMedicineRadiologyComputed tomographyInternal medicineSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant hematoma expansion (HE) affects one-fifth of people within 24 hours after acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), and its prevention is an appealing treatment target. Although the computed tomography (CT)-angiography spot sign predicts HE, only a minority of ICH patients receive contrast injection. Conversely, noncontrast CT (NCCT) is used to diagnose nearly all ICH, so NCCT markers represent a widely available alternative for prediction of HE. However, different NCCT signs describe similar features, with lack of consensus on the optimal image acquisition protocol, assessment, terminology, and diagnostic criteria. In this review, we propose practical guidelines for detecting, interpreting, and reporting NCCT predictors of HE. ANN NEUROL 2019;86:480-492.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.304 · 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