MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048972573 · doi:10.5469/neuroint.2020.00087

A Case of Coincidental Free Floating Thrombus in the Vertebral Artery in a Patient Presenting with an Anterior Circulation Stroke and Literature Review

2020· article· en· W3048972573 on OpenAlexaff
Hosam Al-Jehani, May Adel Alhamid, Yousef Alkhalaf, Faisal Alabbas

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurointervention · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombusAsymptomaticRadiologyStroke (engine)RevascularizationComputed tomography angiographyAngiographyEtiologyCardiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free-floating thrombus (FFT) is a rare condition with unknown etiology as described by many case reports presented in previous literature. The patients usually present symptomatically while the other few patients remain asymptomatic and are usually discovered incidentally on computed tomography angiography (CTA). Most of the cases reported in the literature are of FFT in the internal carotid artery. We present a 59-year-old female as a case of FFT in the vertebral artery which was coincidently discovered on CTA in a patient initially presenting with an anterior circulation stroke. This case highlights the importance of early contrast-based vascular imaging in patients presenting with large vessel strokes that are cardioembolic in nature and the unique utilization of a direct aspiration first pass technique (ADAPT) for revascularization. Included herein an extensive review of the literature about the decision making in patients with FFT and a devised proposed practical approach to this entity.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurointerventionSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207