MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315707223 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a7764

Patterns of Intrathecal Ossification in Arachnoiditis Ossificans: A Retrospective Case Series

2023· article· en· W4315707223 on OpenAlexaff
Bashiar Thejeel, Christian Geannette, Michelle Roytman, David J. Pisapia, J. Levi Chazen, Shari T. Jawetz

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArachnoiditisOssificationCauda equina syndromeEtiologyAnkylosing spondylitisSurgeryRadiologyCauda equinaSpinal cordPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arachnoiditis ossificans is an uncommon end-stage appearance of chronic adhesive arachnoiditis. Imaging features of arachnoiditis ossificans are characteristic and should be diagnosed to avoid unnecessary intervention and guide prognosis and management. In this case series, we retrospectively analyzed CT and MR imaging of 41 patients to identify common patterns of intrathecal ossification and present the common etiologies. Thirty-two patients had a confirmed history of spinal instrumentation, 7 were discovered on imaging without prior surgical history, 1 had a history of ankylosing spondylitis, and 1 had trauma. The most frequent site of ossification was at the conus and cauda equina. Four patterns of ossification were identified, including central, nerve root encasing, weblike, and peripheral. Arachnoiditis ossificans is an important, likely under-recognized consideration in patients who present with back pain. Diagnosis can be made readily on CT; MR imaging diagnosis is also possible but may be challenging.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207