MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192054022 · doi:10.1186/s40478-014-0091-0

Fetal syringomyelia

2014· article· en· W3192054022 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Guo, David Chitayat, Susan Blaser, Sarah Keating, Patrick Shannon

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neuropathologica Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyringomyeliaMedicineSyrinx (medicine)AnatomyAnencephalyChiari malformationOmphaloceleFetusSurgeryPregnancyMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explored the prevalence of syringomyelia in a series of 113 cases of fetal dysraphism and hindbrain crowding, of gestational age ranging from 17.5 to 34 weeks with the vast majority less than 26 weeks gestational age. We found syringomyelia in 13 cases of Chiari II malformations, 5 cases of Omphalocele/Exostrophy/Imperforate anus/Spinal abnormality (OEIS), 2 cases of Meckel Gruber syndrome and in a single pair of pyopagus conjoined twins. Secondary injury was not uncommon, with vernicomyelia in Chiari malformations, infarct like histology, or old hemorrhage in 8 cases of syringomyelia. Vernicomyelia did not occur in the absence of syrinx formation. The syringes extended from the sites of dysraphism, in ascending or descending patterns. The syringes were usually in a major proportion anatomically distinct from a dilated or denuded central canal and tended to be dorsal and paramedian or median. We suggest that fetal syringomyelia in Chiari II malformation and other dysraphic states is often established prior to midgestation, has contributions from the primary malformation as well as from secondary in utero injury and is anatomically and pathophysiologically distinct from post natal syringomyelia secondary to hindbrain crowding.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Neuropathologica CommunicationsSame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207