Prevalence and Associations of Dural Arteriovenous Fistulae in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Analysis of ACTION-CVT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dural arteriovenous fistulae (DAVFs) represent approximately 10% of all intracranial vascular malformations 1 with an incidence of 0.16-1.04per 100,000 person-years.2,3 Prior studies identified an association between cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and DAVF although the direction of causality remains uncertain.In one series, 39% of DAVF patients had a CVT identified within an adjacent or downstream sinus, 4 and patients with DAVF have a higher prevalence of thrombophilia, implicating thrombosis in its pathogenesis.5 We aimed to determine the prevalence and associated factors of DAVF in a large multicenter study of treated CVT.The Anticoagulation in the Treatment of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis (ACTION-CVT) study was a multicenter retrospective study comparing outcomes among CVT patients treated with a vitamin K antagonist versus direct oral anticoagulants.6 The study in-
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".