Midline Shift in Chronic Subdural Hematoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) treatment success relies on radiologic measures, in particular hematoma volume, width and midline shift (MLS). Nevertheless, there are no validated standards for MLS measurement in cSDH. Aim of this study was to identify the most reliable measurement location and technique for MLS. METHODS: Admission CT scans of 57 patients with unilateral cSDH were retrospectively analyzed. Axial slices were evaluated by 4 raters with MLS measurement in 4 locations, foramen of Monro (FM), thalamus (Th), mid-septum pellucidum (SP), maximum overall MLS (max) with 2 different techniques: displacement perpendicular to anatomical (ideal) midline (MLS-M), and displacement relative to the tabula interna in relation to the width of the intracranial space (MLS-T). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess interrater reliability and agreement of MLS‑M and MLS‑T measurement techniques. Measurements of cSDH volume and width were conducted for further data alignment. RESULTS: The ICCs between readers were excellent (> 0.9) for all MLS‑M locations and for MLS-T_Th and ML-T_FM. The ICC was higher for MLS‑M than for MLS‑T in all locations. MLS-M_max showed the highest correlation coefficient of 0.78 with cSDH volume. Variance of MLS-M_max was explained in 64% of cases (adj. R squared) by cSDH volume based on a simple linear regression model. An increase of 10 ml cSDH volume resulted in an average increase of 0.8 mm MLS-M_max. CONCLUSION: The MLS measurement in cSDH patients should be standardized, and due to its high interrater reliability, the MLS‑M technique should be preferred.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".