The Interpeduncular Angle: A Practical and Objective Marker for the Detection and Diagnosis of Intracranial Hypotension on Brain MRI
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Classic findings of intracranial hypotension on MR imaging, such as brain stem slumping, can be variably present and, at times, subjective, potentially making the diagnosis difficult. We hypothesize that the angle between the cerebral peduncles correlates with the volume of interpeduncular cistern fluid and is decreased in cases of intracranial hypotension. We aimed to investigate its use as an objective assessment for intracranial hypotension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: test, and receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to identify an ideal angle threshold to maximize sensitivity and specificity. Interobserver reliability was assessed for classic findings of intracranial hypotension using the Cohen κ value, and the interpeduncular angle, using the intraclass correlation. RESULTS: = .01). With a threshold of 40.5°, sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 96.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The interpeduncular angle is a sensitive and specific measure of intracranial hypotension and is a reliably reproducible parameter on routine clinical MR imaging.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it