Astrocitoma pilocítico en adultos:: experiencia en el Hospital Neurológico de Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJETIVOS 1. Describir los hallazgos en imagen mas frecuentes del astrocitoma pilocitico en adultos.2. Establecer los patrones de imagen especificos en este grupo de edad, atendiendo a su localizacion y caracteristicas radiologicas. MATERIAL Y METODOS Se revisaron los casos de astrocitoma pilocitico de pacientes adultos diagnosticados en el Hospital Neurologico de Montreal desde el ano 2000 hasta 2014.1. Se excluyeron los pacientes de edad inferior a 20 anos. Los datos demograficos se extrajeron de la historia clinica.2. Se analizaron las RM preoperatorias atendiendo a localizacion de la lesion (tronco de encefalo, cerebelo, cerebro), tamano , presencia de quistes , presenciade realce , componente exofitico y senal en las diferentes secuencias de RM.3. Ademas se valoro la presencia de progresion y recurrencia en estudios de seguimiento.4. Se realizo un analisis estadistico utilizando tests de la U de Mann Whitney y tests de Chi Cuadrado
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".