MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403666769 · doi:10.1016/j.inpm.2024.100443

C0-C1 joint injection: Anatomical, clinical and technical review

2024· article· en· W4403666769 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Mares, Carl Majdalani

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Pain Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsBausch Health (Canada)Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)Computer scienceMedicineAnatomyOrthodonticsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cervicogenic headaches (CGH) are proven clinical entities. The prevalence of CGH arising from the atlanto-occipital (AO) joint is unknown. The best evidence for treatment of CGH is for third occipital nerve radiofrequency neurotomy. Treatment of CGH includes intra-articular injections into upper cervical spine joints. To perform a review of the anatomy and clinical presentation of AO joint (AOJ) pain referral as well as a technical description to safely access the AOJ. A literature review was performed to explore the intricacies of the cranio-cervical junction (CCJ) with a focus on the relation between the AOJ and vascular anatomy. Our technical approach is described with complementary images. The AOJ lies anterior to a venous sinus and slightly superior to the horizontally oriented vertebral artery crossing the joint line. The authors propose a modified superior needle trajectory that seeks to avoid these vascular structures and to access the AOJ safely. • The atlanto-occipital (AO) joint can be responsible for cervicogenic headaches. • Interventional treatment of the atlanto-occipital joint (AOJ) requires in-depth knowledge of the vascular anatomy. • A proposed safe technique is presented to access the AOJ considering the treacherous cranio-cervical junction (CCJ) anatomy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional Pain MedicineSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207