MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307918912 · doi:10.1002/mdc3.13608

Clinical Features of Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: Critical Review of Objective Findings

2022· review· en· W4307918912 on OpenAlexaff
Brent Bluett, Elissa L. Ash, Amtul Farheen, Alfonso Fasano, Joachim K. Krauss, Alessio Maranzano, Massimiliano Passaretti, David F. Tang‐Wai, Jay Van Gerpen, Araceli Alonso‐Cánovas, Jinyoung Youn, Jan Malm, Davide Martino

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders Clinical Practice · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of CalgaryOntario Brain InstituteCentre for Movement DisordersToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionNormal pressure hydrocephalusGaitOveractive bladderPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInclusion and exclusion criteriaUrinary incontinencePhysical therapyDiseasePsychiatrySurgeryDementiaInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is characterized by the classic clinical triad of gait, cognitive, and urinary dysfunction, albeit incomplete in a relevant proportion of patients. The clinical findings and evolution of these symptoms have been variably defined in the literature. Objectives: To evaluate how the phenomenology has been defined, assessed, and reported, we performed a critical review of the existing literature discussing the phenomenology of iNPH. The review also identified the instrumental tests most frequently used and the evolution of clinical and radiologic findings. Methods: The review was divided into 3 sections based on gait, cognitive, and urinary dysfunction. Each section performed a literature search using the terms "idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus" (iNPH), with additional search terms used by each section separately. The number of articles screened, duplicates, those meeting the inclusion criteria, and the number of articles excluded were recorded. Findings were subsequently tallied and analyzed. Results: A total of 1716 articles with the aforementioned search criteria were identified by the 3 groups. A total of 81 full-text articles were reviewed after the elimination of duplicates, articles that did not discuss phenomenological findings or instrumental testing of participants with iNPH prior to surgery, and articles with fewer than 10 participants. Conclusions: "Wide-based gait" was the most common gait dysfunction identified. Cognitive testing varied significantly across articles, and ultimately a specific cognitive profile was not identified. Urodynamic testing found detrusor overactivity and "overactive bladder" as the most common symptom of urinary dysfunction.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0220.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement Disorders Clinical PracticeSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207