MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399155419 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a8195

Current Practice: Rationale for Screening Children with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia for Brain Vascular Malformations

2024· review· en· W4399155419 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren A. Beslow, Andrew C. White, Timo Krings, Adrienne M. Hammill, Shih Shan Lang, Atsuko Baba, Marianne S. Clancy, Scott E. Olitsky, Steven W. Hetts

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Anomalies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTelangiectasiaVascular diseasePediatricsVascular malformationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is an autosomal dominant vascular dysplasia characterized by mucocutaneous telangiectasias, recurrent epistaxis, and organ vascular malformations including in the brain, which occur in about 10% of patients. These brain vascular malformations include high-flow AVMs and AVFs as well as low-flow capillary malformations. High-flow lesions can rupture, causing neurologic morbidity and mortality. STATE OF PRACTICE: International guidelines for the diagnosis and management of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia recommend screening children for brain vascular malformations with contrast enhanced MR imaging at hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia diagnosis. Screening has not been uniformly adopted by some practitioners who contend that screening is not justified. Arguments against screening include application of short-term data from the adult A Randomized Trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (ARUBA) trial of unruptured sporadic brain AVMs to children with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia as well as concerns about administration of sedation or IV contrast and causing patients or families increased anxiety. ANALYSIS: In this article, a multidisciplinary group of experts on hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia reviewed data that support screening guidelines and counter arguments against screening. Children with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia have a preponderance of high-flow lesions including AVFs, which have the highest rupture risk. The rupture risk among children is estimated at about 0.7% per lesion per year and is additive across lesions and during a lifetime. ARUBA, an adult clinical trial of expectant medical management versus treatment of unruptured brain AVMs, favored medical management at 5 years but is not applicable to pediatric patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia given the life expectancy of a child. Additionally, interventional, radiosurgical, and surgical techniques have improved with time. Experienced neurovascular experts can prospectively determine the best treatment for each child on the basis of local resources. The "watch and wait" approach to imaging means that children with brain vascular malformations will not be identified until a potentially life-threatening and deficit-producing intracerebral hemorrhage occurs. This expert group does not deem this to be an acceptable trade-off.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.124
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.124
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0170.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicVascular Anomalies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207