MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092795542 · doi:10.1024/0040-5930/a001209

Management nicht rupturierter zerebraler Aneurysmen

2020· review· de· W3092795542 on OpenAlexaff
Marios‐Nikos Psychogios, Alex Brehm, Johanna M. Ospel

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutische Umschau · 2020
Typereview
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) are a common coincidental finding in cranial imaging of patients with non-correlated symptoms such as headache or dizziness. With an estimated prevalence of around 1 - 2 % in the general population, these UIAs often present clinicians with difficult decisions. This is particularly the case since, despite extensive research in this area, the natural course of UIAs is still poorly understood and the risk of rupture cannot be specified. Due to often catastrophically clinical outcomes as a result of an aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (mortality-rates of up to 51 %), the desire for intervention and the emotional burden on the patient in the case of diagnosis of an UIA is often very high. For this reason, the knowledge of average rupture rates, factors that influence them, but also knowledge of the complication rates and the result of interventions is essential for the clinician in order to arrive together with the patient at a responsible and reasonable decision regarding the treatment of an UIA. In this review, we present the current state of science regarding the natural course of UIAs, the possibilities of intervention and strategies in patient management based on current guidelines.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueTherapeutische UmschauSame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207