Imaging protocols for non-traumatic spinal cord injury: current state of the art and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Non-traumatic spinal cord injury (NTSCI) is a term used to describe damage to the spinal cord from sources other than trauma. Neuroimaging techniques such as computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have improved our ability to diagnose and manage NTSCIs. Several practice guidelines utilize MRI in the diagnostic evaluation of traumatic and non-traumatic SCI to direct surgical intervention. AREAS COVERED: The authors review practices surrounding the imaging of various causes of NTSCI as well as recent advances and future directions for the use of novel imaging modalities in this realm. The authors also present discussions around the use of simple radiographs and advanced MRI modalities in clinical settings, and briefly highlight areas of active research that seek to advance our understanding and improve patient care. EXPERT OPINION: Although several obstacles must be overcome, it appears highly likely that novel quantitative imaging features and advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) as well as machine learning (ML) will revolutionize degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) care by providing earlier diagnosis, accurate localization, monitoring for deterioration and neurological recovery, outcome prediction, and standardized practice. Some intriguing findings in these areas have been published, including the identification of possible serum and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, which are currently in the early phases of translation.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".