MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011420608 · doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000001414

Segmental Spinal Myoclonus After a Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection

2020· article· en· W3011420608 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Boudier‐Revéret, Min Cheol Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlycogen Storage Diseases and Myoclonus
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyoclonusAnesthesiaLidocaineLocal anestheticSurgeryEpidural spaceElectromyographyEpidural steroid injectionLow back pain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In clinical practice, cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection is commonly used for alleviating pain. We report a case of segmental spinal myoclonus that developed after cervical transforaminal local anesthetic and steroid injection. A 39-yr-old man presented involuntary movements of the bilateral upper trapezius muscles after cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection on the right C6 and C7 roots with a 5 mg of dexamethasone injectate mixed with 0.5 ml of 1% lidocaine and 0.5 ml of normal saline at each level. His myoclonus was semirhythmic and continuously persisted at a frequency of approximately 30 episodes per minute. The myoclonus continued even at rest and during sleep. In addition, it was resistive to stimulus, such as touch and voluntary action. Based on the clinical features, the patient was diagnosed as having a segmental spinal myoclonus. Clonazepam 0.25 mg was administered three times daily. The myoclonus gradually improved and resolved completely within 2 wks. Segmental spinal myoclonus is one of rare complications after cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection. Clinicians should be aware of the likelihood of this potential complication.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & RehabilitationSame topicGlycogen Storage Diseases and MyoclonusFrench-language works237,207