MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281690014 · doi:10.3390/neurolint14020040

Reversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome in the Postpartum Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2022· review· en· W4281690014 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology International · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological Complications and Syndromes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad San Francisco de Quito
KeywordsMedicineReversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndromeSubarachnoid hemorrhageObservational studyPostpartum periodSystematic reviewPediatricsEpidemiologyPregnancyMEDLINEInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS) encompasses a clinical and radiological diagnosis characterized by recurrent thunderclap headache, with or without focal deficits due to multifocal arterial vasoconstriction and dilation. RCVS can be correlated to pregnancy and exposure to certain drugs. Currently, the data on prevalence of RCVS in the postpartum period is lacking. We aim to investigate the prevalence of RCVS in the postpartum period and the rate of hemorrhagic complications of RCVS among the same group of patients; (2) Methods: We conducted the metanalysis by using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) protocol. To analyze the Bias, we used the Ottawa Newcastle scale tool. We included only full-text observational studies conducted on humans and written in English. We excluded Literature Reviews, Systematic Reviews, and Metanalysis. Additionally, we excluded articles that did not document the prevalence of RCVS in the postpartum period (3). Results: According to our analysis, the Prevalence of RCVS in the postpartum period was 129/1083 (11.9%). Of these, 51/100 (52.7%) patients had hemorrhagic RCVS vs. 49/101 (49.5%) with non-hemorrhagic RCVS. The rates of Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ICH) and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH) were (51.6% and 10.7%, respectively. ICH seems to be more common than.; (4) Conclusions: Among patients with RCVS, the prevalence in PP patients is relativity high. Pregnant women with RCVS have a higher recurrence of hemorrhagic vs. non-hemorrhagic RCVS. Regarding the type of Hemorrhagic RCVS, ICH is more common than SAH among patients in the postpartum period. Female Sex, history of migraine, and older age group (above 45) seem to be risk factors for H-RCVS. Furthermore, recurrence of RCVS is associated with a higher age group (above 45). Recurrence of RCVS is more commonly idiopathic than being triggered by vasoactive drugs in the postpartum period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.235 · 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