MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992671168

Acute Nerve Injury

2019· article· en· W2992671168 on OpenAlexaff
Alwalaa Althagafi, Mustafa Nadi

Bibliographic record

VenueStatPearls · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpineuriumEndoneuriumPerineuriumMedicineAnatomyPeripheral nervePeripheral nervous systemInternal medicineCentral nervous system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, our knowledge of peripheral nerves and peripheral nerve injuries (PNIs) came mainly from experiences on the battlefield. Sir Herbert Seddon published his PNI classification system while caring for the injured during the second world war (1942). Nevertheless, in modern times, it is not uncommon to encounter PNI in non-combat-related trauma cases. These injuries can be life-changing and are often associated with significant morbidity, potentially leading to significant disabilities. Given that they mostly present in young adults of working age, these disabilities carry lifelong implications for the patients.Peripheral nerve trunks are composed of three separate layers surrounding nerve fibers. The innermost collagenous endoneurium layer envelops the axonal fibers (myelinated or unmyelinated) to provide mechanical and metabolic support. Together they make up the nerve fascicles, each of which is surrounded by a flattened cellular layer called the perineurium. The outer most collagenous layer, called the epineurium, surrounds the fascicles. Knowledge of this anatomy is essential for comprehending the classifications, clinical findings, and prognosis of PNIs and, thus, the best possible management for each patient.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.010

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueStatPearlsSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207