ARISE I Consensus Statement on the Management of Chronic Subdural Hematoma
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ARISE (Aneurysm/AVM/cSDH Roundtable Discussion With Industry and Stroke Experts) organized a one-and-a-half day meeting and workshop and brought together representatives from academia, industry, and government to discuss the most promising approaches to improve outcomes for patients with chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH). The emerging role of middle meningeal artery embolization in clinical practice and the design of current and potential future trials were the primary focuses of discussion. Existing evidence for imaging, indications, agents, and techniques was reviewed, and areas of priority for study and key questions surrounding the development of new and existing treatments for cSDH were identified. Multiple randomized, controlled trials have met their primary efficacy end points, providing high-level evidence that middle meningeal artery embolization is a potent adjunctive therapy to the standard (surgical and nonsurgical) management of neurologically stable cSDH patients in terms of reducing rates of disease recurrence. Pooled data analyses following the formal conclusion and publication of these trials will form a robust foundation upon which guidelines can be strengthened for cSDH treatment modalities and optimal patient selection, as well as delineate future lines of investigation.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it