MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404519522 · doi:10.1007/s00701-024-06333-2

Volumes and velocities: Meta-analysis of PC-MRI studies in normal pressure hydrocephalus

2024· review· en· W4404519522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helen Whitley, Petr Skalický, Awista Zazay, Adéla Bubeníková, Ondřej Bradáč

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neurochirurgica · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisNeuroradiologyMagnetic resonance imagingCochrane LibraryStroke (engine)HydrocephalusNeurologyInclusion and exclusion criteriaRadiologyInternal medicineNuclear medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE : Phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (PC-MRI) represents an opportunity to non-invasively investigate cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) flow in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). Studies in recent years have explored the diagnostic and prognostic value of PC-MRI derived parameters. This review aims to identify all PC-MRI studies of iNPH published since 2010, synthesise a review based on collated results, and analyse specific flow parameters identified in the selected studies. METHODS: Our protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO [CRD42020180826]. We systematically searched four databases: Pubmed, Web of Science, Ovid, and Cochrane library to identify all eligible studies. Quality assessment was performed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale [19]. Systematic review was conducted according to Prisma guidelines. A random-effects model was used to perform meta-analysis on the available flow parameters. RESULTS: Eighteen records were identified for inclusion. Five studies were eligible for meta-analysis, representing 107 iNPH patients and 82 controls. CSF flow parameters available for analysis were stroke volume and peak velocity. Both were significantly higher than controls (p = 0.0007 and p = 0.0045 respectively) according to our random-effects analysis, consistent with a model of hyper-dynamic CSF in iNPH. Our systematic review revealed average stroke volumes in iNPH ranging from 43uL to over 200uL. Peak velocity values ranged from 5.9 cm/s to 12.8 cm/s. CONCLUSION: Significant increases in stroke volume and peak velocity values in iNPH patients suggest a place for PC-MRI as supplementary evidence in the diagnostic work-up of iNPH. Although shunting reduces aqueductal stroke volume and peak velocity, the ability of pre-shunt values to reliably predict treatment response remains complicated. We suggest that it may be more appropriate to consider a range of values that reflect varying probabilities of shunt success. We recommend that future studies should prioritise standardising PC-MRI protocols, and before then PC-MRI findings should be considered supportive rather than determinative.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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 venueActa NeurochirurgicaSame topicCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusFrench-language works237,207