Nonaneurysmal perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage on noncontrast head CT: An accuracy, inter-rater, and intra-rater reliability study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the reliability and accuracy of nonaneurysmal perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage (NAPSAH) on Noncontrast Head CT (NCCT) between numerous raters. 45 NCCT of adult patients with SAH who also had a catheter angiography (CA) were independently evaluated by 48 diverse raters; 45 raters performed a second assessment one month later. For each case, raters were asked: 1) whether they judged the bleeding pattern to be perimesencephalic; 2) whether there was blood anterior to brainstem; 3) complete filling of the anterior interhemispheric fissure (AIF); 4) extension to the lateral part of the sylvian fissure (LSF); 5) frank intraventricular hemorrhage; 6) whether in the hypothetical presence of a negative CT angiogram they would still recommend CA. An automatic NAPSAH diagnosis was also generated by combining responses to questions 2-5. Reliability was estimated using Gwet's AC1 (κG), and the relationship between the NCCT diagnosis of NAPSAH and the recommendation to perform CA using Cramer's V test. Multi-rater accuracy of NCCT in predicting negative CA was explored. Inter-rater reliability for the presence of NAPSAH was moderate (κG=0.58; 95%CI: 0.47,0.69), but improved to substantial when automatically generated (κG=0.70; 95%CI: 0.59,0.81). The most reliable criteria were the absence of AIF filling (κG=0.79) and extension to LSF (κG=0.79). Mean intra-rater reliability was substantial (κG=0.65). NAPSAH weakly correlated with CA decision (V=0.50). Mean sensitivity and specificity were 58% (95%CI: 44%,71%) and 83% (95%CI: 72%,94%), respectively. NAPSAH remains a diagnosis of exclusion. The NCCT diagnosis was moderately reliable and its impact on clinical decisions modest.
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 | 0.025 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".