Migraine-Like Positive Visual Phenomena Related to Focal Cortical Lesions with Undetectable Visual Field Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migraines are commonly associated with a visual aura that has a characteristic clinical presentation. Cortical lesions within or in close proximity to the retrochiasmal visual pathways may also present in a manner that mimics migrainous visual phenomena and, in some cases, may be too small to manifest with a visual field defect on formal testing. We present 4 patients (3 females and 1 male) with an average age of 48.5 (range 28-67) years who had migraine-like visual disturbances related to a right temporal meningioma, occipital cavernoma, occipital lobe infarction, and demyelination in the optic radiations, which was the presenting sign of multiple sclerosis. No patient underwent neurosurgical intervention, and 1 patient (occipital lobe infarct) had complete resolution of the symptom after initial presentation. All patients had normal visual fields at follow-up and no thinning evident on optical coherence tomography. Our cases emphasize the importance of a history in assessing patients with transient positive visual phenomena and identify pathology that may present without visual field defects. Clinical features that should raise a doubt about a diagnosis of migraine visual aura include the absence of headache, brief visual disturbance lasting <5 min or those lasting >60 min, and age >40, especially with no past medical history of migraine.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".