MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047712622 · doi:10.4103/ajir.ajir_11_20

The Pattern of Publications on Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations and Cavernomas in the Middle East and North Africa

2020· article· en· W3047712622 on OpenAlexaff
Amira Alolyani, Horia M. Alotaibi, May Adel Alhamid, Faisal Alabbas, Hosam Al-Jehani

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Arab Journal of Interventional Radiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMiddle EastPublishingArteriovenous malformationGeographyRadiologyPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cerebrovascular malformations are encountered frequently in clinical practice, but not much is known about the pattern of publication in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries. We aim to evaluate the status and pattern of publications of cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVM) and cavernomas in the MENA. Materials and Methods: PubMed database was searched for publications on cerebral AVM and cavernomas in the MENA between 2009 and 2019. Results: We found only 94 publications in the MENA region out of 31,333 publications pertaining to AVMs (0.3%). The highest publishing country was Turkey, with 50 (53.1%) studies. The case report was the study design used most by authors with 59 (62.7%) studies. The majority of publications were by neurosurgeons with 42 of 94 (42.4%) papers. European journals ranked first in the number of published articles with 42 of 94 (46.1%) articles. Conclusions: We found a limited number of publications on cerebral AVMs and cavernomas by MENA countries in the past decade. Research support and national/regional registries are important factors to improve the academic output on AVMs and cavernomas in the MENA region.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Arab Journal of Interventional RadiologySame topicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207